Re: [cmake-developers] daemon-mode: Infrastructure
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 02:00:14 +0200, Tobias Hunger wrote:
> Implementing new Protocol Versions:
> ==
> Deprecating old Protocol Versions:
>
One idea that came up on a previous project was the following:
namespace protocol {
namespace aspect1 {
namespace v1 {
}
namespace v2 {
}
}
namespace aspect2 {
namespace v1 {
}
}
namespace v1 {
namespace aspect1 = aspect1::v1;
namespace aspect2 = aspect1::v1;
Version version(1, 0);
bool deprecated = true;
}
namespace v2 {
namespace aspect1 = aspect1::v2;
namespace aspect2 = aspect1::v1;
Version version(2, 0);
bool deprecated = false;
}
namespace latest = v2;
}
Then the code can use `protocol::v1::aspect1::` for explicit v1
communication and `protocol::latest::` in any normal code. It does
require C++11 though. There's probably some template metaprogramming
magic that could be done to instantiate communication ends for each
protocol namespace once communication is done.
I have no idea how maintainable in the long-term this is though.
--Ben
--
Powered by www.kitware.com
Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at:
http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ
Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more
information on each offering, please visit:
CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html
CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html
CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
Re: [cmake-developers] daemon-mode: Infrastructure
Hi Brad, Am 17.06.2016 22:24 schrieb "Brad King" : > > On 06/13/2016 08:00 PM, Tobias Hunger wrote: > > * There will always be 1 client talking to a server. > > * Client/Server communicate using JSON messages > > Yes. IIRC it is using stdin/stdout (I haven't checked the code), > so limiting to one client is implicit. True. Still it does not hurt to state explicitly, especially considering that I think of the stdin/out as an implementation detail. There is no reason for the code not to switch to pipes or sockets for communication. > In this case, is it actually a daemon? It is not expected to outlive > the client that started it. Perhaps we should consider a different name. I am bad at names:-) Plus Stephen made quite a bit of PR for the CMake daemon idea. > One possible problem with using stdin/stdout is that when CMake runs the > configuration the project code can do things like execute_process that > may share the stdout with the child process. That may allow the child > process to print content formatted to look like the protocol and trick > the client. Ideally all output handling would avoid printing things to > stdout in server/daemon mode, but that may take some effort to achieve. Yes, unexpected output on stdout could cause havok to the parser. So far this worked well though, and the magic string before/after messages prevented any unexpected interactions. > > What do you think? Does this make sense? > > It sounds fine to me. I'll state the caveat that I've had little experience > in maintaining versioned protocols like this though. Hopefully others can > review this too. Yes, I hope other IDE developers will chime in at some point... > On 06/14/2016 04:30 AM, Tobias Hunger wrote: > > I think it would make perfect sense to ship the first cmake version with > > included daemon-mode with a big, fat warning that the interfaces are not > > finalized yet and will change in incompatible ways during the first release > > cycle (or maybe two:-). > > Yes. Should we make the option to activate it different, and include > "experimental" in its name? I think the idea is that no clients should > be released that depend on the experimental behavior in CMake. I now added a patch that allows protocol versions to be marked as experimental. These are only visible to clients that started "cmake -E daemon --experimental". The only existing protocol version is now marked experimental. I think that makes it pretty clear what is experimental and what is not and clients do not need to change (except for maybe dropping the --experimental flag) to go to a stable interface once we are satisfied with the first version. Best Regards, Tobias -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit: CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
Re: [cmake-developers] daemon-mode: Infrastructure
On 06/13/2016 08:00 PM, Tobias Hunger wrote: > * There will always be 1 client talking to a server. > * Client/Server communicate using JSON messages Yes. IIRC it is using stdin/stdout (I haven't checked the code), so limiting to one client is implicit. In this case, is it actually a daemon? It is not expected to outlive the client that started it. Perhaps we should consider a different name. One possible problem with using stdin/stdout is that when CMake runs the configuration the project code can do things like execute_process that may share the stdout with the child process. That may allow the child process to print content formatted to look like the protocol and trick the client. Ideally all output handling would avoid printing things to stdout in server/daemon mode, but that may take some effort to achieve. > What do you think? Does this make sense? It sounds fine to me. I'll state the caveat that I've had little experience in maintaining versioned protocols like this though. Hopefully others can review this too. On 06/14/2016 04:30 AM, Tobias Hunger wrote: > I think it would make perfect sense to ship the first cmake version with > included daemon-mode with a big, fat warning that the interfaces are not > finalized yet and will change in incompatible ways during the first release > cycle (or maybe two:-). Yes. Should we make the option to activate it different, and include "experimental" in its name? I think the idea is that no clients should be released that depend on the experimental behavior in CMake. Thanks, -Brad -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit: CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
Re: [cmake-developers] daemon-mode: Infrastructure
PS: I think it would make perfect sense to ship the first cmake version with included daemon-mode with a big, fat warning that the interfaces are not finalized yet and will change in incompatible ways during the first release cycle (or maybe two:-). In my experience you only get the full feedback once the first release is out and users can test it without building the code themselves. So this would provide an opportunity to battle-harden all the daemon-mode APIs without commiting us too early. Best Regards, Tobias -- Tobias Hunger, Senior Software Engineer | The Qt Company The Qt Company GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Mika Harjuaho. Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B -- Powered by www.kitware.com Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ Kitware offers various services to support the CMake community. For more information on each offering, please visit: CMake Support: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/support.html CMake Consulting: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/consulting.html CMake Training Courses: http://cmake.org/cmake/help/training.html Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe: http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
