I think this one falls under the category of "reasonable, but currently unimplemented feature." Not sure if there's a JIRA ticket open for this (nothing springs to mind). Worth opening one, I don't see any reason not to support this.
-----Original Message----- From: Stephen Haberman [mailto:step...@exigencecorp.com] Sent: Monday, August 23, 2010 1:36 PM To: thrift-user@incubator.apache.org Subject: const bug Hi, We're running an old pre-0.3 thrift and trying upgrade, but running into a compile error. I've reduce it down to this example: struct A { 1: string name = "" } const A DEFAULT_A = {} struct B { 1: A a = DEFAULT_A } The problem is that with "a = DEFAULT_A", we get this exception: type error: const "a" was declared as struct/xception If I remove "= DEFAULT_A", then it works great. Just looking at the thrift file, using the DEFAULT_A const as a default value seems to make sense. Is this a bug, or is it really illegal to use const structs as default values? Thanks, Stephen
