David Crayford wrote: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBCDIC_1047 > > Note the non-contiguous letter sequences. EBCDIC sucks, but it is used > on enterprise machines and is still used for the majority of the > worlds production data. Protocol Buffers seem like a fantastic > alternative to XML, which is proving to be a huge bottleneck for > mainframe applications trying to web enable legacy applications. > > What modules/classes contain the ASCII specific code? >
ok, it looks like the problem is tokenizer.cc - the character classes ain't gonna cut it for EBCDIC. I think I could patch that by using cctype, but there's some comments in there warning against it's use? > Kenton Varda wrote: >> If your compiler transforms string literals to a non-ASCII character >> set, then the code generated by the protocol compiler won't work. We >> could perhaps fix this by escaping every character in the embedded >> descriptor, but other problems might come up. I don't have enough >> experience with EBCDIC to know what to expect. >> >> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 4:03 AM, daveyc <dcrayf...@gmail.com >> <mailto:dcrayf...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> >> I built Protocol Buffers on a z/OS mainframe. Build was fine but the >> unit test choked: >> >> libprotobuf FATAL google/protobuf/descriptor.cc:1959] CHECK failed: >> proto.ParseFromArray(data, >> size): >> >> Without digging too deep in the code, is the parser capable of >> handling EBCDIC? >> >> >> > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
