[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-1039?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16733002#comment-16733002
]
James E. King III commented on THRIFT-1039:
-------------------------------------------
I can confirm as of 0.12.0:
A structure with a list<binary> field generates:
```
@org.apache.thrift.annotation.Nullable
public java.util.List<java.nio.ByteBuffer> getBinaries() {
return this.binaries;
}
```
A structure with a binary field generates:
```
public byte[] getBytes() {
setBytes(org.apache.thrift.TBaseHelper.rightSize(bytes));
return bytes == null ? null : bytes.array();
}
```
I agree that it is strange to have two different types for the same thing.
If a change were made in this area I would want it to have a java compiler
option that defaulted to the new mode, had the option of generating the
old mode, and was documented as a breaking change.
I'll leave this open in the backlog because it is a valid issue.
> Refactor methods accessing binary data
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-1039
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-1039
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Java - Compiler
> Environment: All
> Reporter: Mathias Herberts
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: THRIFT-1039.patch
>
>
> Since THRIFT-830, binary fields are implemented using ByteBuffer.
> struct A {
> 1: binary bin_field,
> }
> will generate a method 'byte[] getBin_field()' which will optionally resize
> the underlying ByteBuffer so it has a capacity of 'remaining()' and return
> the backing array of this new ByteBuffer.
> This has several implications.
> First the ByteBuffer in 'bin_field' might be modified, thus misleading users
> into thinking that the call to 'getBin_field()' had no effect on the
> underlying structure.
> Thus the following will fail:
> byte[] b = new byte[2];
> b[0] = 0x01;
> A a = new A();
> a.setBin_field(ByteBuffer.wrap(b, 0, 1));
> byte[] bb = a.getBin_field();
> b[0] = 0x02;
> Assert.assertEquals(0x02, bb[0]);
> Second it creates a singularity in the getters as all other getters involving
> containers of binary data will return collections of ByteBuffer.
> I suggest we refactor to something more in the line of what HADOOP-6298 has
> done, i.e. provide a copyBytes() method which copies the bytes in a
> ByteBuffer and returns a correctly sized array.
> Such a method could be generated for each structure, with the following
> signature:
> public byte[] copyBytes(ByteBuffer b);
> This method would basically do what the current 'getBin_field' type methods
> do (allocate a byte array and fill it with the ByteBuffer's data), except it
> would not modify the structure's internal ByteBuffers.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
