[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-2628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14063952#comment-14063952
]
Jens Geyer edited comment on THRIFT-2628 at 7/16/14 7:18 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Hi [~alisdair]
FYI, a lot of the test cases in this {{NameConflictTest.thrift}} file are a bit
edgy, by intention. We had (have?) similar conflicts in other languages, for
similar reasons. Of course, that's ot to say that these issues do not deserve
to be fixed - they do.
was (Author: jensg):
[~alisdair]
FYI, a lot of the test cases in this {{NameConflictTest.thrift}} file are a bit
edgy, by intention. We had (have?) similar conflicts in other languages, for
similar reasons. Of course, that's ot to say that these issues do not deserve
to be fixed - they do.
> erlang: struct member name conflicts due to lowercased names
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-2628
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-2628
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Erlang - Compiler, Erlang - Library
> Reporter: alisdair sullivan
> Labels: erlang
>
> the erlang backend generates records to represent structs. instead of the
> unique sequential id they use the struct field name as the record keys.
> records in erlang do not support repeated keys so generated erlang modules do
> not compile
> the most obvious fix is to refuse to generate code from structs with repeated
> keys but this means the erlang backend is not capable of handling all valid
> structs
> the easiest fix is to switch structs to use the unique sequential ids as the
> keys of the record but this breaks backwards compatibility and probably
> necessitates generating helper functions to retrieve fields by name
> also possible is switching to an erlang data structure that supports repeated
> keys but this would also require breaking backwards compatibility
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
