This may be a naive question, but wouldn't the format in text_format be a prime example another "protocol"? It seems that if you are able to reuse the vistor generate the text format, then it would be easily extendable by others for json or the latest encoding of the week.. I look forward to seeing it pushed into the tree.
thanks -jeff On Feb 8, 2:34 pm, Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Evan Jones <ev...@mit.edu> wrote: > > > The Visitor class has two standard implementations: "Writer" and > >> "Filler". MyStream::Writer writes the visited fields to a > >> CodedOutputStream, using the same wire format as would be used to encode > >> MyStream as one big message. > > > Imagine I wanted a different protocol. Eg. I want something that checksums > > each message, or maybe compresses them, etc. Will I need to subclass > > MessageType::Visitor for each stream that I want to encode? Or will I need > > to change the code generator? > > To do these things generically, we'd need to introduce some sort of > equivalent of Reflection for streams. This certainly seems like it could be > a useful addition to the family, but I wanted to get the basic functionality > out there first and then see if this is needed. > > Note that I expect people will generally only "stream" their top-level > message. Although the proposal allows for streaming sub-messages as well, I > expect that people will normally want to parse them into message objects > which are handled whole. So, you only have to manually implement the > top-level stream, and then you can invoke some reflective algorithm from > there. > -- 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.
