[zeromq-dev] Porting libzmq to C++11
BJovke .
bjovan at gmail.com
Fri May 19 15:21:17 CEST 2017
I have a feeling that C++14 and C++17 are just improvements of C++11.
C++11 is the game changer, 14 and 17 don't bring ground breaking stuff.
I would be also happy to contribute to C++11 libzmq but I'm not sure how
much stuff I can do.
I'm currently not familiar with inner workings of libzmq enough detailed to
be confident to rewrite it, although I'm reading the docs and code day by
day.
My time to spend is questionable, sometimes I have a lot of time and
sometimes I cannot contribute for days or even weeks.
There are also many aspects of libzmq which make it hard to adopt the code,
instead requiring complete rewrite:
2017-05-18 20:29 GMT+02:00 Jens Auer <jens.auer at betaversion.net>:
> Hi,
>
> I would be happy to contribute to such a project, even if many users will
> stay with the "old" code. For me, it is a great way to learn something. I
> would also be happy to aim for C++14 or even C++17 once it is officially
> released. I think structured bindings and the new if (init; condition)
> will be very helpful. C++17 also has std::optional.
>
> Cheers,
> Jens
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: zeromq-dev [mailto:zeromq-dev-bounces at lists.zeromq.org] Im Auftrag
> von Aram Santogidis
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2017 10:57
> An: ZeroMQ development list
> Betreff: Re: [zeromq-dev] Porting libzmq to C++11
>
> Hi,
>
> a good reason to modernize the codebase, or even better to create a new
> project ala libzmq11, is to help its evolution with new networking
> technologies and software engineering practices.
>
> As an example, consider the difficulties many faced (including myself) in
> extending ZeroMQ to support RDMA-based networking interfaces. The current
> design and implementation is hostile to such extensions.
> Honestly, C++98 or not, I think it still can be done but with major cost
> in development effort and additional complexity to an already complex
> codebase.
>
> Moving to C++11 and beyond is not merely an argument of fashion, as some
> of you implied, but it is vital for its future.
> C++ and related technologies evolve and libzmq stays behind. New
> developers are reluctant to contribute once they have a look at the
> current design and implementation (old school C++ roughly speaking).
>
> Think for example when networking will be included in the standard, how
> much ugly code that juggles platform differences could be eliminated from
> the current implementation. Same applies for threading, which is in the
> standard since C++11.
>
> I don't underestimate the importance (and the size?) of the current
> userbase. I'm aware from first-hand experience about some fairly critical
> software that relies on libzmq.
>
> I guess the idea is to create i) a new project in the ZeroMQ organization
> that ii) implements ZMTP and iii) the non-depricated ZMQ socket types. The
> public API of libzmq should be a subset of the
> libzmq11 so that will facilitate the transition of users, in the long
> term, that do not run on legacy systems.
>
> I will happily contribute to such an effort provided that there will be at
> least one or two experienced members from the community that will join this
> effort.
>
> Cheers,
> Aram
>
>
>
>
>
> On 17.05.2017 16:54, BJovke . wrote:
> > Well, you're right. There must be a good reason for such an undertaking.
> > I too feel that C++11 itself is not good enough reason.
> > Anyway there has to be enough people willing to contribute to it.
> >
> > I was just saying this because no idea should be discarded right away,
> > but for sure there needs to be a valid need and reason for it.
> >
> > Greetings.
> >
> > 2017-05-17 16:15 GMT+02:00 Doron Somech <somdoron at gmail.com
> > <mailto:somdoron at gmail.com>>:
> >
> > What will be the benefit from moving to C++11? And more important
> > what is the benefit from having two projects? one supporting C++11
> > and one not?
> >
> > I think that maintaining two repositories is hard and not sure for
> > what cause?
> >
> > Anyway, if some one want to do it, in the zeromq philosophy, please
> > fork and add the project to the zeromq organization.
> >
> > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 4:29 PM, <lists at chuckremes.com
> > <mailto:lists at chuckremes.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On May 17, 2017, at 7:56 AM, BJovke . <bjovan at gmail.com
> <mailto:bjovan at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello.
> > >
> > > Libzmq is not even fully C++ compliant:
> > > - There's no exception handling.
> > > - There are no RAII principles implemented.
> > > - Parent/child object hierarchy is loose or not implemented,
> all of the burden of proper order of calls is on programmer.
> > >
> > > And so on...
> > >
> > > C++11 is really a remarkable feat of engineering and me
> personally like to see fully C++11 implemented software.
> > > Unfortunately, for libzmq this would require substantial
> rewrite of the library.
> > >
> > > Maybe there's an option to create another parallel branch to
> existing libzmq or even create another product, for example "libzmq11"?
> > > On the wire this could be 100% compatible with non-C++11
> libzmq but there would be 0% chance to compile older projects with it.
> >
> > This is a good time to bring out some old blog posts. Martin
> > Sustrik was the original developer of libzmq. He had some
> > thoughts on why he should have written the library in C instead
> > of C++. Here you go:
> >
> > http://250bpm.com/blog:4
> >
> > http://250bpm.com/blog:8
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > zeromq-dev mailing list
> > zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org <mailto:zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org>
> > https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> > <https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > zeromq-dev mailing list
> > zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org <mailto:zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org>
> > https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> > <https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Jovan Bunjevački.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > zeromq-dev mailing list
> > zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> > https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>
--
Jovan Bunjevački.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20170519/acffef1c/attachment.htm>
More information about the zeromq-dev
mailing list