No problem, no offence taken, though in my personal opinion it's a little counter productive to have many bindings targeting the same language/framework.
The reason I created CLRZMQ2 was because I felt the original wasn't idiomatic C# so I could hardly hold it against you, hehe. The reference counting is a very good idea though, which had not occurred to me. On Wed, 2010-12-22 at 00:51 +0000, Alex Forster wrote: > > You do know that clrzmq2 supported all of what you mentioned besides the > > reference counting. > > > > If you had of submitted a patch for clrzmq2 it would have been very > > welcome. > > I certainly didn't mean to offend. I'll admit that, while I did have some > different ideas as to what a C#-ified ZeroMQ API should look like, the biggest > motivator for my rewrite was to become more familiar with ZeroMQ. You'll > notice > that the p/invoke class (ZeroMQ.Interop) is heavily documented and tested - > that > was purely for my benefit. > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
