Rename module to zmq

[gar1t]

This is not really an "issue".

I also realize it's a big suggestion/request. But the "erl" prefix on the module name (used only within Erlang) is superfluous and, while certainly not horrible, could be dropped to make the API that much more compact.

erlzmq:connect(...) // twitch, twitch

zmq:connect(...) // ahhhh

[yrashk]

One of the reasons why it is called erlzmq is to avoid confusion with the first version of the erlang binding (https://github.com/zeromq/erlzmq) since it used zmq module naming and its API is not fully compatible with erlzmq2's.

[gar1t]

Makes sense, but too bad -- too small a world. But the rewrite is
1000% worth the three extra chars!

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:05 PM, yrashk
[email protected]
wrote:

One of the reasons why it is called erlzmq is to avoid confusion with the first version of the erlang binding (https://github.com/zeromq/erlzmq) since it used zmq module naming and its API is not fully compatible with erlzmq2's.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#8 (comment)

[yrashk]

Initially it was called ezmq so it was just one extra character, but when it graduated to become the next official binding, there was a decision made to call it erlzmq.

[yrashk]

I think that there should just be a better explanation of differences between erlzmq and erlzmq2. erlzmq, even though it is seriously slower than erlzmq2, has its own uses. For example, on older Erlang systems where proper NIF functionality is not available yet.

On the other hand, I'll be willing to review any attempt to consolidate these two projects — or even just solid ideas based on researching the grounds — as I obviously understand the benefits of the consolidation. It is just that I currently have other priorities so I can't dedicate much time to this project; but if somebody feels like undertaking it partially or fully — I'll be as supportive as I can.