[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-4675?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Buğra Gedik updated THRIFT-4675:
--------------------------------
Description:
The code generated for JS constants involving the {{int64}} Thrift type do not
reply on the {{Int64}} JS type (from the {{node-int64}} package). For example:
{code}
const i64 MAX_INT64 = 9223372036854775807
const i64 SMALL_INT64 = 15
{code}
This results in generating the following code:
For node.js:
{code}
ttypes.MAX_INT64 = 9223372036854775807;
ttypes.SMALL_INT64 = 15;
{code}
For the browser:
{code}
MAX_INT64 = 9223372036854775807;
SMALL_INT64 = 15;
{code}
Since JS cannot represent integers that do not fit into a double precision
floating point, this will result in lost precision.
The correct output should be (showing for node.js):
{code}
ttypes.MAX_INT64 = new Int64(''7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF'');
ttypes.SMALL_INT64 = new Int64(15);
{code}
Besides this, none of the Typescript type bindings ({{.d.ts]} files) contain
the types for int64 types. This includes both the constants, types, and service
method parameters.
Note that fixing this may break some of the existing code. So please advise if
this should be a separate option or not. In my mind, this is how it should work
by default, but I don't know the policy in Thrift regarding backward
compatibility.
was:
The code generated for JS constants involving the {{int64}} Thrift type do not
reply on the {{Int64}} JS type (from the {{node-int64}} package). For example:
{code}
const i64 MAX_INT64 = 9223372036854775807
const i64 SMALL_INT64 = 15
{code}
This results in generating the following code:
For node.js:
{code}
ttypes.MAX_INT64 = 9223372036854775807;
ttypes.SMALL_INT64 = 15;
{code}
For the browser:
{code}
MAX_INT64 = 9223372036854775807;
SMALL_INT64 = 15;
{code}
Since JS cannot represent integers that do not fit into a double precision
floating point, this will result in lost precision.
The correct output should be (showing for node.js):
{code}
ttypes.MAX_INT64 = new Int64(''7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF'');
ttypes.SMALL_INT64 = new Int64(15);
{code}
Besides this, none of the Typescript type bindings (.d.ts files) contain the
types for int64 types. This includes both the constants, types, and service
method parameters.
Note that fixing this may break some of the existing code. So please advise if
this should be a separate option or not. In my mind, this is how it should work
by default, but I don't know the policy in Thrift regarding backward
compatibility.
> JS code generators not handling int64 type properly for constants and for
> TypeScript type mappings
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-4675
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-4675
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JavaScript - Compiler
> Affects Versions: 0.11.0
> Reporter: Buğra Gedik
> Priority: Major
>
> The code generated for JS constants involving the {{int64}} Thrift type do
> not reply on the {{Int64}} JS type (from the {{node-int64}} package). For
> example:
> {code}
> const i64 MAX_INT64 = 9223372036854775807
> const i64 SMALL_INT64 = 15
> {code}
> This results in generating the following code:
> For node.js:
> {code}
> ttypes.MAX_INT64 = 9223372036854775807;
> ttypes.SMALL_INT64 = 15;
> {code}
> For the browser:
> {code}
> MAX_INT64 = 9223372036854775807;
> SMALL_INT64 = 15;
> {code}
> Since JS cannot represent integers that do not fit into a double precision
> floating point, this will result in lost precision.
> The correct output should be (showing for node.js):
> {code}
> ttypes.MAX_INT64 = new Int64(''7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF'');
> ttypes.SMALL_INT64 = new Int64(15);
> {code}
> Besides this, none of the Typescript type bindings ({{.d.ts]} files) contain
> the types for int64 types. This includes both the constants, types, and
> service method parameters.
> Note that fixing this may break some of the existing code. So please advise
> if this should be a separate option or not. In my mind, this is how it should
> work by default, but I don't know the policy in Thrift regarding backward
> compatibility.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
