I didn't really go through the whole thread, so I might have missed something, but it's not clear to me how you plan to distinguish different values in the data stream. But protobuf's serialization primitives are in CodedInputStream/CodedOutputStream.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 8:49 AM, gabor.dicso <gabor.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, thanks for all the responses. Sorry if my goals were not > perfectly clear. To put it simple, what I am looking for is > essentially something like "byte[] intBytes = > ProtoBuf.intToBytes(100);" / "int i = > ProtoBuf.readInt(bytesOfSerializedObject);" so that the values are > serialized and deserialized platform-independently. Such functionality > is obviously present in the ProtoBuf codebase. It would be great if it > was made public so I could use it in my code. To save CPU time and > memory, I want to avoid wrapping primitive types or any similar > workarounds, it's going to be a very frequent operation. > > The reason why I need all this is that I must map the information > stored in the fields of my data classes to a list of special data > classes from third-party code. It's not a simple field-by-field > mapping, e.g. two fields may need to be mapped to the same third-party > class serialized after each other. This mapping is where I require > cross-platform binary serialization. All these operations must be made > by generated code based on annotations in my data classes. What at > first may seem like over-complicating things is actually my effort to > make things as simple and effective as possible. :) > > As for now, I finally decided to go with Thrift's binary > serialization. But if it ever becomes possible to use ProtoBuf's > serialization functionality in a similar way, I'd definitely like to > hear about it. :) > > Gabor > > On Jun 16, 8:29 pm, Christopher Smith <cbsm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think Gabor wants to avoid the overhead of implementing all that > > additional bookkeeping as it'd slow down development. Something that > > would effectively generate a protobuf descriptor so that it'd stay > > consistent with changes in the Java code. > > > > I would suggest looking at the protostuff project: > > > > http://code.google.com/p/protostuff/ > > > > I think it has all that is needed to achieve the goals Gabor is looking > for. > > > > --Chris > > > > 2011/6/16 Miguel Muñoz <swingguy1...@yahoo.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree with Marc. When things get complicated, it's a good idea to > > > separate your tasks. It seems like your java class, which generates > > > some of the data based on other data, is one issue, and your > > > serialization is a separate issue. (I know it would be nice to just > > > make that class serializable, but that may be where you make things > > > complicated.) > > > > > When I want to serialize my classes with protobufs, I create a > > > separate protobuf object to just handle serialization. Then I create a > > > utility class that transfers data between my protobuf object and my > > > java class. Then it's easy to add a constructor to my java class that > > > takes a protobuf object and defers the work to the utility class. > > > > > When I transfer data using protobufs, I don't convert to the protobuf > > > format until the last possible moment before sending, and I > > > immediately convert to the java class on receiving data. That lets me > > > put my protobuf objects behind a facade, so I don't need to know the > > > serialization details. > > > > > -- Miguel Muñoz > > > > > On Jun 15, 7:07 am, "gabor.dicso" <gabor.di...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Hi all, > > > > >> I would like to be able to serialize primitive types platform- > > >> independently. I have hand-written Java data classes and I want to > > >> serialize their primitive fields using a cross-platform framework. > > >> These classes can not be generated, they must be written by hand, > > >> additional code is generated based upon them. Also, serializing the > > >> object as a whole isn't an option either, because the fields sometimes > > >> have to be processed before serializing their values. I have to > > >> serialize the fields separately. It must be made cross-platform > > >> because the values will be stored in a database and they may be read > > >> from other platforms. Creating wrapper PB-objects for each primitive > > >> type is an overhead I must avoid because the operation will be done > > >> very frequently and with large amounts of data. > > > > >> I found that Protocol Buffers addresses cross-platform serialization > > >> of objects, but I could not figure out how to use it as a > > >> serialization framework for primitive types (without having > > >> created .proto descriptors). Is it possible to use PB as a cross- > > >> platform serializer-deserializer framework for primitive types? > > >> Thanks, > > > > >> Gabor Dicso > > > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. > > > To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com. > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// > groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en. > > > > -- > > Chris > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Protocol Buffers" group. > To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
