Wanted to add to this that maybe generating DLLs and unix shared libraries (basically .so files) would be another option. I don't really know how that would be structured but might be worth looking at.
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 1:03 AM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > James, Maybe I'm missing something but I'm still not quite seeing how > protobuf helps us here. It requires a "schema" of some sort and Gremlin > results are anything but a schema. So you've told me that protobuf3 > doesn't require that, but after a some limited review of the docs i don't > see where it behaves like that: > > https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto3 > > The best I could see was that it has an Any "data type" which can take > arbitrary bytes...is that what you meant? > > > The Any message type lets you use messages as embedded types without > having their .proto definition > > if so, doesn't that still leave us in a position where we still need to > serialize results to that blob? no? I also saw that there is support for > Map: > > https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto3?hl=en#maps > > but it looks like it must have homogeneous values, which might be a > limitation we could live with, though I am aware of production gremlin that > returns mixed value Map (same issue with List). > > I think you're going to have to elaborate a bit more with some specifics. > > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Marko Rodriguez <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi James, > > > > I'm not so on the up-and-up when it comes to > > RPC/Protobuffs/MessagePack/WebSockets/etc. (are those even in the same > > category?! :). > > > > Can you say a little more on how this would help cross-language support? > > Are we saying something more than what we (Stephen) already do with > > WebSockets and the binary Gremlin protocol? > > > > http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/3.1.0-incubating/#_developing_a_driver > > > > Thanks, > > Marko. > > > > http://markorodriguez.com > > > > On Dec 2, 2015, at 3:24 PM, James Thornton <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Adding HTTP2 support via gRPC would give us solid, cross-language > support > > > and allow us to auto-generate the client libraries http://www.grpc.io > > > > > > I had worked on a SPDY module, but HTTP2 has now become a standard > since > > > usurped it. > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > - James > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > James Thornton, *http://electricspeed.com <http://electricspeed.com>* > > > > >
