[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-5314?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17235158#comment-17235158
]
Allen George edited comment on THRIFT-5314 at 11/19/20, 3:55 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
What should the right behavior be? If the receiver gets a new enum value that
exists in the sender...what should the receiving code generate?
EDIT: Note that I'm agreeing there's a problem. I'm not sure what the 'correct'
behavior looks like on the receiver's side. For example, does every generated
enum have a hidden "__unknown" variant that encodes the unrecognized enum value?
was (Author: allengeorge):
What should the right behavior be? If the receiver gets a new enum value that
exists in the sender...what should the receiving code generate?
> Enum forward compatibility
> --------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-5314
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-5314
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Rust - Compiler, Rust - Library
> Affects Versions: 0.13.0
> Reporter: Remi Dettai
> Priority: Major
>
> It seems that enums in the Rust implem are not forward compatible. As Thrift
> enums are mapped 1:1 to Rust enum, if a newer Thrift definition adds a case
> to an enum, an error will be returned when parsing the message.
> Is this intended? Is there a workaround?
> (We met this problem in the Rust parquet implem:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-10553)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
