Overall I think this is a good direction. I made a bunch of more detailed comments on the patch.
--Rafael On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Rajith Muditha Attapattu <rajit...@gmail.com > wrote: > Rafi, further to our discussion I have posted a patch to illustrate the > approach we plan to take. > This should enable me to make progress until you get a chance to make > further changes on the Decoder side. > > Regards, > > Rajith > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Rajith Muditha Attapattu < > rajit...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> More questions. >> >> For all the maps we return should we restrict them to <String, Object> or >> should it be <Object, Object> ? >> Technically one could use a Number (int, long) etc as a key.. >> >> Any opinion here? ;) >> >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Rafael Schloming <r...@alum.mit.edu> >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Rajith Muditha Attapattu < >>> rajit...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Rafi could u pls answer the two questions I had in the code? >>>> >>>> 1. Your uint method only takes an int .. shouldn't it take a long? Bcos >>>> it could contain a value larger than a java int? >>>> >>> >>> To be honest I don't quite remember for sure, but I think it will do the >>> two's complement and put it on the wire as a proper unsigned value. In >>> other words I think it's just using the int type as a convenient/efficient >>> way to pass around 4 bytes. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> 2. What should I use for boolean? there is no getBoolean .. or an >>>> equivalent method >>>> >>> >>> I think you might need to add this. I probably just omitted it. >>> >>> --Rafael >>> >> >> >
