Sorry for the delay.
On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 13:47:19 +0900, Robert Jacques <sandf...@jhu.edu>
wrote:
Other little things,
-Why isn't nil mapped to null?
Where?
MsgPack has a nil type which I assume is equivalent to null. So why
isn't it simply included in the object serializer (and arguably also
in the array and map serializer as well)?
Sorry, I can't understand this statement. Nullable types(class, array
and associative-array)
is serialized to nil if null.
Sorry. The comment was about redundancy. i.e. packNil <=> pack(null).
I added pointer type (de)serialization.
For that matter, packNil, packTrue, packFalse, etc are all redundant
with pack(T).
I removed packTrue, packFalse.
Furthermore, stream, packArray, packMap and packRaw all should be
internal routines. (Though, a rawPack(T)(T value) routine might not go
amiss)
I moved packRaw to internal method, but packArray and packMap should be
public.
MessagePack's array and map can contain any type.
I can see the usefulness of the functionality, but for an end-user API,
it is brittle and error-prone. For example:
p.packArray(3).pack(5).pack("six"); produces an incorrect msgPack
stream. A better syntax would be: p.pack(5,"six"); or
p.packArray(5,"six"); I know you're using pack(Types...) to mean
pack(Types[0]).pack(Types[1])... but using it for variable type arrays
is worth considering. For packMap, pack( ["key": "value"], [5:"six"] )
could work, but packMap( ["key": "value"], [5:"six"] ) or
packMap("key","value",5,"six") would avoid confusion with pack(Types...).
I have thought about this point. In the result, I changed (Un)Packer API.
It's true that your suggested syntax is better.
Old packArray was renamed to beginArray and new packArray serializes
container type using variadic arguments. Of course, Map too.
-----
/* old */
packer.packArray(2).pack(true, 10);
/* new */
packer.packArray(true, 10);
// == packer.beginArray(2).pack(true, 10)
-----
Thanks for pointing out this.
Masahiro
