Le 15/10/2013 17:05, Pieter Hintjens a écrit :
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Laurent Alebarde <[email protected]> wrote:
OK, now it works. Pieter, are you interested in having this test :
The best tests are, IMO, focused on a single aspect of behavior or the
API, and "prove" that nothing has broken as we make changes.
So I'm not sure what you are "proving" with this test case. If it's
something already covered by other tests, it's redundant and just
slows down the build process. If you have a case that the existing
tests don't cover, it's worth adding IMO.
There is no test for zmq_proxy at all today. But it may be considered
validated by design or by usage since it has been here for a while.
Besides, the test can be reduced in time.
My general advice would be to always contribute code you feel is
useful, but be prepared for others to remove it if they feel it's not
worthwhile.
I will do it if there are some thumbs up.
If you look at the code, you will see a variant of zmq_proxy with an
additional socket argument that adds flow control to the proxy with
STOP/RESUME/TERMINATE commands. This argument has defaults to NULL, then it
is fully backward compatible. I can pull request that if you which.
You cannot change the existing zmq_proxy API but you could certainly
add a new one. If you do, please make sure you write a man page and a
test case :-)
Isn't it what I have written ?
So please, libzmq users, thumbs up/down the following :
1) STOP/RESUME/TERMINATE flow-control on zmq_proxy via an additional socket
2) zmq_proxy test
With 3 thumbs up, I will do it, with one down, I will leave it.
Thanks
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
