On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 5:17 AM, Ben Taitelbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I work in a ruby shop with thrift, and I agree that it would be nice to > follow more ruby idioms with the thrift libraries, especially with rdoc and > rspec, and with a gem for installing. The naming conventions haven't been a > problem for us, and we kind of enjoy the fact that it would be easy for us > to start developing thrift services in c++ or java since we already know the > API.
Yeah, I've considered the advantages of a unified-ish api. I think it might make sense to maintain the T on class names. I don't like it, but it's nothing if not consistent with the other bindings. CamelCasing has to go though ;) > The one HUGE request we have for the rewrite is to do some type-checking, or > allow for type checking to be turned on/off. Currently when a service method > returns an incorrect type, or throws an undeclared exception, we get a > TTransportException with no explanation. Even worse, in some instances when > a method returns a string when an array was expected, the call just hangs. This might make sense. Please file a JIRA. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT -- Kevin Clark http://glu.ttono.us
