[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-2429?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13980600#comment-13980600
]
Randy Abernethy commented on THRIFT-2429:
-----------------------------------------
Hey All,
Presently Apache Thrift implements function parameter lists in an args struct
under the covers. So anything that works in a struct is quite feasible in a
parameter list. The semantics are however different, which I think is Andrew's
point. As Ben has pointed out earlier the semantics of all of this are
paramount, not just the ease or possibility of implementation. If we do it and
it isn't clear and consistent, droves of future users will be affected.
Waiting a few more days for everyone to get a chance to digest and comment...
> Provide option to not write default values, rely on receiver default
> construction instead
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-2429
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-2429
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: C++ - Compiler
> Affects Versions: 0.9.1
> Reporter: Chris Stylianou
> Assignee: Randy Abernethy
> Labels: default, optional, required
>
> Would there be any objections to a patch that does not write default values
> (essentially the same logic as the optional attributes). This obviously
> relies on the receiving application using the same IDL version to ensure the
> defaults used on object construction match the senders.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
