Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-04 Thread Henrique Mendonça
As no one else commented I just wanted to point out that probably both 2a and 2b are acceptable as long the implementation is generic enough to avoid duplicated code on different generators. I believe 2a should use warnings to avoid restricting current working IDL's and 2b could give errors directl

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-02 Thread Stig Bakken
2a sounds good to me, since it is consistent. That could be important for projects that ship thrift files intended for users who want to build their own clients, for example. Another discussion could be to catch the same types of issues for field and enum names. But that is... another discussion :

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-02 Thread Konrad Grochowski
So most people agree: no aliases (shame ;) ) Soo... I see two potential changes as a result of this discussion: 1. Add i8 for consistency 2. Add dictionary of reserved keywords and validate all type and variable names against it a. one global dictionary containing merge of keywords of all

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-02 Thread Jens Geyer
'long' on most 32-bit platforms is 32-bit. 'long' on Max and Linux 64-bit is 64-bits, but 'long' on Win64 is 32-bits. True. Another point against it.

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-02 Thread Jens Geyer
Hi, Out of curiosity, what kinds of errors did you see from this? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27216939/apache-thrift-c-typedef-issue Not me personally, but I remember having seen a similar question a few weeks ago. For some reason people seem to like their ints more than i32. It's not

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-02 Thread Stig Bakken
s/is a service/is a better service/ ;-) On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Stig Bakken wrote: > @Konrad: My point about errors came to mind because I had just been > working on the JSON generator, where type names are strings. I guess > it won't apply if the aliases are only present at parse time. >

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-02 Thread Stig Bakken
@Konrad: My point about errors came to mind because I had just been working on the JSON generator, where type names are strings. I guess it won't apply if the aliases are only present at parse time. However, these vague type definitions from C / Java have been the cause of a lot of portability hea

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-01 Thread Henrique Mendonça
@Konrad, that might be a good idea to have a 'reserved type and members names', perhaps a little table on each generator/parser. So the c++ generator can throw a warning or error before it gets to the compiler (e.g. gcc), since 'typedef i32 int' might work in some languages but it's definitely not

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-01 Thread Konrad Grochowski
I was assuming aliases would only be present at parsing time. I to prefer iX notation, I like to be explicit. Yet I can imagine a lot of users, who don't care about bits and bytes, they just want int. Or they want to make IDL look more like Java/C# ;) I'd not try to detect all 'typedef i32 int

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-01 Thread Stig Bakken
FWIW, I agree with Randy. There is value to being able to directly compare two type names through simple equality, with aliases you will get situations where you need code like "are_these_types_the_same(t1, t2)". On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Randy Abernethy wrote: > One of the things I love

Re: Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-01 Thread Ben Craig
r 'short' and 'int', but the platforms where those are 'unusual' sizes tend to be more unusual themselves. Allegedly, old Cray machines made all the primitives 64-bit, even char. Randy Abernethy wrote on 12/01/2014 08:10:18 AM: > From: Randy Abernethy > To: "

Re: Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-01 Thread Randy Abernethy
GMT+01:00) > Do: dev@thrift.apache.org > Temat: Re: i32 vs int > > One of the things I love about Thrift is its simple IDL. No aliases > just simple self describing types (i8, i16, etc). We presently have > one keyword for each feature of the IDL. I think the Pandora's box > analogy is a g

ODP: Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-01 Thread Konrad Grochowski
There's no i8 but byte, which creates inconsistency ;) Oryginalna wiadomość Od: Randy Abernethy Data:01.12.2014 14:21 (GMT+01:00) Do: dev@thrift.apache.org Temat: Re: i32 vs int One of the things I love about Thrift is its simple IDL. No aliases just simple

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-01 Thread Randy Abernethy
One of the things I love about Thrift is its simple IDL. No aliases just simple self describing types (i8, i16, etc). We presently have one keyword for each feature of the IDL. I think the Pandora's box analogy is a good one. It is hard work keeping things simple. On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 12:09 AM,

Re: i32 vs int

2014-12-01 Thread Stig Bakken
Out of curiosity, what kinds of errors did you see from this? - Stig On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Jens Geyer wrote: > Hi *, > > I have found people multiple times doing things like this, ending up with > strange errors. > > typedef i32 int > > What about making it legal and allowing in

Re: i32 vs int

2014-11-30 Thread Konrad Grochowski
Hey, I'd go with aliases, including 'short' and 'long' and 'i8' just to keep everything consistent :) Best, Konrad W dniu 2014-12-01 o 01:18, Jens Geyer pisze: Hi *, I have found people multiple times doing things like this, ending up with strange errors. typedef i32 int What about