[email protected] said: > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Martin Lucina <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 1) The message itself is misleading. There are many people who run into > > issues with mailbox due to a completely *different* problem, namely system > > resource limits (e.g. OSX). This has nothing to do with socket migration. > > Do they hit this actual assert?
That's one of them they can hit, yes. Read the code :-) > > 3) Last but not least, IMHO libraries should *not* print "helpful" > > messages. This leads to horrible practices, for example start a random Gtk > > application; you will more often than not see all sorts of assertion > > failures and other crap printed and it's obvious that no one cares, much > > less does anything about it. > > Libraries should not print unhelpful messages either. I don't see how > telling the user where to look will lead to horrible practice. > > E.g. we already print a "helpful" messages on OOM, and it does actually work. Which is probably the right thing to do for internal allocations where we can't recover; see my other email. But for anything which can actually return ENOMEM to the user that's what we should do. > > I realise you have an assert(0) there so the code *will* fail, but I'd > > still like to avoid going down this path. > > Can you propose an alternate path that solves the problem in hand, > instead of just rejecting this one? > > The problem here is wasted time re-solving a *known* issue. Put up a FAQ about thread safety then, and explicitly tell people not to migrate sockets between threads. -mato _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
