On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:29 AM, MinRK <[email protected]> wrote: > zmq_device is particularly valuable in Python. Due to Python's infamous > GIL, having > a C-thread that will remain responsive regardless of blocking Python code > (e.g. a FORWARDER device as heartbeat) > is a pretty big deal. > I imagine that when we bring pyzmq up to speed on 3.0, we will have to > reimplement some amount of zmq_device > in Cython to restore this extremely useful functionality.
+1 > -MinRK > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 02:01, Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Martin, >> >> Am I right to understand that zmq_device[3] has gone from 3.0? >> >> This wasn't on the roadmap, and wasn't discussed anywhere, and does >> break production code in a fatal way, i.e. it's not just a matter of >> changing an API, a layer that people used has actually disappeared. >> >> Not that it's a bad idea, but don't you think it's better to discuss >> such changes up-front? >> >> Presumably if a C++ device loop is no longer available in libzmq, many >> people will have to reimplement that in slower languages. I'm happy to >> add this functionality to libzapi but that's not meant to support >> other languages. >> >> -Pieter >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > -- Brian E. Granger Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo [email protected] and [email protected] _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
