On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Andrew Hume <[email protected]> wrote:
> for example, if each of two threads needs to do a bind, and a connect to the > other's bind, then this becomes a complicated dance. Uhm, I'd say you have other problems if you create two co-dependent threads like this. The only use case I can think of is when I want to demonstrate how to write such a bogus (excuse me :-) piece of code using 0MQ that it will deadlock. Decent upright tasks should never be co-dependent like this. > i guess its not bad if all the binds are independent, and all the connects > depend only on the binds. > but if any of this depends on other connections, then its really bad. > (but maybe it always is.) Inproc architectures cannot be random; they follow a structure and that should IME be *strictly* hierarchical, so bind can always come before connect. This saves inproc, by some luck, because it wasn't clear when the transport was designed. -Pieter _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
