[zeromq-dev] Thread Safe sockets

Dave Duchene dduchene at absolute.com
Tue Feb 7 19:11:05 CET 2012

Why not add JSON and XML serialization for messages while we're at it? Why not have a configuration language for describing socket pairs? Because it complicates the library, and isn't needed for most applications. And *most importantly*, because the users of the library aren't asking for it.

I think it's wrong because it goes against the spirit of what ZMQ is to me. Like other software components that I like, ZMQ has opinions about how things should be done. It might not be the same opinion as yours, and it might not suit every particular set of requirements, but ZMQ 2.1 draws a line in the sand and basically says "I think inter-machine, inter-process, and inter-thread communication should all happen via the same abstraction: the socket." Given that opinion, there is no need for sockets to be shared between threads.


-----Original Message-----

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 12:50:13 +1100
From: john skaller <skaller at users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Thread Safe sockets
To: ZeroMQ development list <zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org>
	<BCF76CE5-DB16-4DC8-A227-AB0D5ACF7084 at users.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On 07/02/2012, at 12:14 PM, Dave Duchene wrote:

> John,
> What's wrong with wrapping the entire API if you happen to want enforceable user space locking? 

There is nothing technically wrong with it: just re-inventing the wheel when 
the feature could possibly be provided more easily.

What's wrong with providing the locking inside the API?

john skaller
skaller at users.sourceforge.net

More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list