> > as far as I understand majority of the language with GC leave the > > closing to GC. Otherwise this would cause annoying issues where the > > object for the socket is valid but the underlying socket is invalid. > > There should be no need for explicit close as usually object going out > > of scope closes the socket. > > It would be more appropriate if the binding developers explain why they've > added the function, however, my guess is that it's used to close the socket > immediately, as opposed to leaving it to GC to clean it at some later time. > > Think of, for exmaple, bound ports. If you close the socket you want the port > to be available for new sockets immediately rather than lingering on.
This is exactly why. Sometimes you cannot wait until GC triggers and must close your sockets before that happens. -- Gonzalo Diethelm DCV Chile _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
