> From: > Francisco Albani > Subject: > Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] ZMQ REQ / > REP naming Swap? > Date: > Thu, 28 Jul 2016 23:21:25 -0300 > > ______________________________________________________________________ > Michael, I found the need to do the same for some applications. I also > needed to choose between bind and connect (I made this a parameter of > my block). > > > Wouldn't be better to have just one sink and one source with > selectable options, like: > * socket_type: REP/REQ/SUB/PUB/PUSH/PULL > > * method: bind / connect > > * interface: stream / message >
I think this would make the gr-zmq C++ block code unnecessarily complex and harder to maintain. The block requirements for each combination of parameters grow in different directions. Some things you'd have to deal with: 1. REP blocks have a receive then send main loop; REQ blocks have a send then receive main loop. 2. REQ/REP can never drop messages/samples and so the tag propagation code can be simple; PUB/SUB can drop messages/samples and tag propagation code needs to account for that in tag offsets 3. GNURadio messages are usually small enough that they can be handled in one call to work(). GNURadio sample stream payloads can have a great many samples that need to be handled across several calls to work(). It's just not worth it at the C++ level. Maybe at the GRC block XML file level, it might be worth it. My $0.02 Regards, Andy _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio