On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Craig Tiller <[email protected]> wrote:
> Reread the proposal: one of the key requirements here is no libc++ > dependency. We'll be using the C++ language, but in a way that avoids all > the runtime baggage. > I must have missed that, sorry. Without libc++ it sounds more reasonable. > I expect some work for wrapped language folks here, and the implementation > plan is careful to ensure we can roll back quickly if this fails (but I > don't believe it will) > The advantage for some short term extra effort is a more maintainable and > approachable core in perpetuity, and that's a huge advantage long term. > Unless it's more than 1-3 days worth of work for each wrapped lang, it looks like a good investment. > One implementation trick we used on Windows for Python and Ruby was to > have two build environments: one for the extension (using whatever the > platform required), and another for gRPC, using something more modern. > We've got codegen smarts ready to go to dynamically load the c core bits > from a DLL without even a link time dependency. I'm certain if we hit > painful cases in other wrapped languages we can extend such an approach > within days. > I really hope we won't need to resort to that, but yeah, let's keep it in mind. > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017, 2:18 AM 'Jan Tattermusch' via grpc.io < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I remember we went through quite some trouble when trying to build C core >> so that it is compatible with wide range of libc versions. I expect things >> to become even worse when libc++ comes into play. My guesstimate is that >> introducing C++ into C core would cost 2 weeks of work & testing per >> wrapped language to make sure everything works the way it should >> (especially around the distribution packages & platform compatibility etc.) >> I'm not 100% sure if we could make things work for all languages without >> harming usability (but I can be convinced - it would be worth to experiment >> with one wrapped lang. before we decide to go ahead). >> >> >> On Saturday, April 1, 2017 at 4:39:49 PM UTC+2, Craig Tiller wrote: >> >> https://github.com/grpc/grpc/pull/10426 and https://github. >> com/grpc/grpc/pull/10427 start to show what this might look like. >> >> On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 7:33 AM Craig Tiller <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I've created a proposal to allow C++ to be used in gRPC Core here: >> https://github.com/grpc/proposal/pull/21. >> >> I'm especially interested in hearing from folks in environments where >> this won't work well. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "grpc.io" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/grpc-io. >> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ >> msgid/grpc-io/2e080e70-29b0-4c60-9379-3459ffd3fa4f%40googlegroups.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/grpc-io/2e080e70-29b0-4c60-9379-3459ffd3fa4f%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "grpc.io" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/grpc-io. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/grpc-io/CACF4M0Ta-QZXYg9%3D97_ZkkN06QJL87J1srTffT4w0%3DhZrmrX7w%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
