[Bro-Dev] Broker status update
robin at icir.org
Mon May 23 08:23:26 PDT 2016
On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 09:01 -0700, you wrote:
> peer(x, y); // Create a peering between the two endpoints.
> peer(y, x); // Idempotent. Peerings are symmetric.
> x.peer(y); // Create a peering between the two endpoints.
> y.peer(x); // Idempotent. Peerings are symmetric.
I would prefer the 2nd way for consistenct, as all the other
operations use the method-based scheme. The idempotency seems
secondary to that I would say.
Related question: what exactly are the semantics if only one side of
the peering is set up?
> - Bindings: For Python, I'm considering switching to pybind11 ,
> which provides a much more convenient API than SWIG and supports
> modern C++11.
Hmm ... I see the appeal but it would introduce a new dependency and
its Python-specific (I assume), whereas with SWIG it's easier to add
more languages later. Is that worth the benefit of switching?
Robin Sommer * ICSI/LBNL * robin at icir.org * www.icir.org/robin
More information about the bro-dev