[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3706?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15877108#comment-15877108 ]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on THRIFT-3706: ---------------------------------------- Github user jeking3 commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/thrift/pull/1200#discussion_r102357395 --- Diff: lib/java/test/org/apache/thrift/test/TestServer.java --- @@ -190,7 +193,9 @@ public static void main(String [] args) { if (protocol_type.equals("binary")) { } else if (protocol_type.equals("compact")) { } else if (protocol_type.equals("json")) { - } else if (protocol_type.equals("multiplexed")) { + } else if (protocol_type.equals("multi")) { --- End diff -- I did it this way to work within the spec:impl naming convention that currently exists in make cross. See tests.json, specifically "binary:accel" or "compact:accelc". I wanted to follow the pattern that already existed in the test suite so we have a single use pattern, not two. In the end the behavior is mostly the same, except by using "multi:binary" on the java server and "binary:multi" on the c_glib client, we end up testing: c_glib (binary client) => java (multi server) as well as c_glib (multi client wrapping binary) => java (multi server wrapping binary). Using the "multiplexed-binary" naming convention would not have leveraged the existing logic in crosstest/collect.py to make this happen. > There's no support for Multiplexed protocol on c_glib library > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: THRIFT-3706 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-3706 > Project: Thrift > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: C glib - Library > Affects Versions: 0.9.3 > Reporter: Gonzalo Aguilar > Assignee: James E. King, III > Fix For: 0.11.0 > > > There's no multiplexed protocol. > I will implement the same way it's done in Java an C++ -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)