By binary format, you mean the serialized data. In our scenario, shared
memory is not used as a transport medium, it's the data itself. Think of
it as variables not shared between threads but between processes.
Le mercredi 28 octobre 2020 à 17 h 38 min 29 s UTC-4, acoz...@google.com a
That could work but I suspect it would be a fair amount of work to
implement. I think at that point you would almost be implementing an
alternative serialization format for protocol buffers. Would it make sense
to just store the plain binary format in shared memory?
On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 11:29
Thanks for the feedback.
Would it make sense for protobuf to create a class as per the .proto
definition but with NO extra stuff, in its own .h file. Then the real
message proto class would derive from that. Any code that used the class
only need to include the .h of the class no need to
You are right that C++ protos are not POD and therefore might not be a good
fit for your use case. You could try looking at other protobuf
implementations such as UPB and protobuf-c. Since they are written in C I
think they meet the POD requirement.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 8:56 PM Mario Not64
Hello,
New to protobuf. Like to implement it in our existing code base. We
currently use cereal to serialiaze the data. We have over 100
structs/classes send over TCP/IP. However reading about protobuf I came
across an issue that I wounder if other have tackled and found a solution
for.
