[zeromq-dev] conventions in bindings

Martin Lucina martin at lucina.net
Thu Feb 2 12:34:00 CET 2012

ph at imatix.com said:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Gary Wright <at2002+zmq at me.com> wrote:
> > message:
> > fragment:
> > frame:
> Makes sense. "fragment" is long, for an API word. But in fact the only
> real issue to solve here is consistency: any semantics will work, if
> repeated consistently. So there will be a lot of changes to make in
> bindings, code, and docs. Anyone proposing changes has to be willing
> to take this work on. There is no other way it will happen. ("I think
> someone should do X" does not work and never has).

IMHO most of the changes discussed in this thread (but I haven't followed
the whole discussion, so I may have missed some) are documentation changes.

If I end up working on this, I will treat renaming of actual stable API
calls or datatypes with extreme prejudice.


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list