On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 05:52:42 UTC, Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote: > On Tuesday, 18 August 2015 at 20:44:25 UTC, Suliman wrote: >> Lars, did you thought about full port? I read post of etcimon about his Botan lib. He eventual decided to rewrite original lib from C++ to D to make code more easier maintainable. > > I considered it, yes, but it is a *lot* more work, and I think the wrapper solution turned out rather nice. The ZMQ API is pretty "wrappable", and I don't expect it to become much more complex in the future either. The big changes these days seem to be in the ZMQ guys' own high-level wrapper library, CZMQ, rather than in ZMQ core. > > Recently, I've played around with the idea of making a pure D implementation of Scalable Protocols, which was created by Martin Sustrik, one of the original ZMQ authors. He invented SP and the reference implementation, nanomsg ( > > So many fun projects, so little time... > > Lars On Tuesday, 18 August 2015 at 20:44:25 UTC, Suliman wrote:I considered it, yes, but it is a *lot* more work, and I think the wrapper solution turned out rather nice. The ZMQ API is pretty "wrappable", and I don't expect it to become much more complex in the future either. The big changes these days seem to be in the ZMQ guys' own high-level wrapper library, CZMQ, rather than in ZMQ core.Recently, I've played around with the idea of making a pure D implementation of Scalable Protocols, which was created by Martin Sustrik, one of the original ZMQ authors. He invented SP and the reference implementation, nanomsg ( http://nanomsg.org ), partly as kind of a do-over for some things he considered design mistakes in ZMQ. SP seems "cleaner" and more principled than ZMQ in many ways.So many fun projects, so little time...Lars