On Sun, 21 Oct 2012 02:13:30 +0200 "Chris Nicholson-Sauls" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Saturday, 20 October 2012 at 07:28:07 UTC, Nick Sabalausky > wrote: > > Not a big deal, but does anyone have or know of a usable > > up-to-date > > protocol buffers implementation for D? All I've found is this: > > > > https://256.makerslocal.org/wiki/index.php/ProtocolBuffer > > > > But it's old, says its status is only "mid-implementation", has > > no > > license info, and I think it might be D1. > > It has been started at least three times that I know of, but I > don't think anyone ever finished such a beast (I'm guilty of one > of those myself). But in related news, in case it fits what > you're hoping to do, I've written a binding, and am in the > process of a wrapper, for zeroMQ: https://github.com/csauls/DZMQ > > It is usable in the simplest sense as is; so maybe if you're > willing to roll your own object<->string conversions, this would > be a start. > I just needed message packing/unpacking, and it looks like that's outside the scope of ZeroMQ, so that's not really what I needed. But ZeroMQ does look really good though, maybe I *should* have been looking for it ;) I may consider using it, but my biggest concern is that I can't find anything about using it for UDP-style "Fast as possible *without* worrying about dropped, out-of-order, or duplicated packets." Because some of my data will be of that nature. If it had that *and* optional encryption (comparable with HTTPS/SSL/TLS) for some (although not all) messages, then I'd be *totally* sold on it.
