Hi Pieter, hi all, On 03/20/2012 11:35 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Steffen Mueller > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'd be really happy to get some feedback on both the ZMQ::Declare >> library and the suggestions regarding the ZDCF spec. > > First off, it's really nice to see someone picking up the ZDCF specs > and running with them. > > For your suggestions, yes, of course. Why not fork the spec, make your > own version, with the changes you want, and push that to the RFC site. > This is how the process works. It's not source code, so no patch > process, just forking for improvements.
http://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:17 now has the improvements wrt. to versioning. I've refrained from implementing the other two suggestions (larger scope: include full applications; extensibility: don't share the same dictionary between object attributes and names of sub-objects) at the same time since I believe that versioning trumps virtually anything else in utility. Without it, having anything like a spec is rather pointless. I'll tackle the other two, but I'd love to get approval for the versioning before I proceed. On a related note, the structural ZDCF validator that is part of ZMQ::Declare is virtually language independent (Rx), so for it should be a solved problem for anyone who thinks about using ZDCF. The way I wrote it, it interpolates things in Perl, but it could be read from a JSON file just as well. See lines 8 to 82: https://github.com/tsee/ZMQ-Declare-Perl/blob/master/lib/ZMQ/Declare/ZDCF/Validator.pm#L8 Best regards, Steffen _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
