[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-2628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Anthony Molinaro reopened THRIFT-2628:
--------------------------------------
Breaking backwards compatibility in this way is unacceptable. I have tons of
production erlang code which would have to be changed if this remains as is.
Why didn't this happen the way I suggested with an option for mixed_case. I
think I might have mostly made it through that change. I'll dig around and see
what I have, but breaking backwards compatibility is really bad.
> erlang: struct member name conflicts due to lowercased names
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-2628
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-2628
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Erlang - Compiler, Erlang - Library
> Reporter: alisdair sullivan
> Assignee: Roger Meier
> Labels: erlang
> Fix For: 0.9.2
>
>
> the erlang backend generates records to represent structs. instead of the
> unique sequential id they use the struct field name as the record keys.
> records in erlang do not support repeated keys so generated erlang modules do
> not compile
> the most obvious fix is to refuse to generate code from structs with repeated
> keys but this means the erlang backend is not capable of handling all valid
> structs
> the easiest fix is to switch structs to use the unique sequential ids as the
> keys of the record but this breaks backwards compatibility and probably
> necessitates generating helper functions to retrieve fields by name
> also possible is switching to an erlang data structure that supports repeated
> keys but this would also require breaking backwards compatibility
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
