[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-224?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12656205#action_12656205
]
Bryan Duxbury commented on THRIFT-224:
--------------------------------------
Interesting. I see you've implemented the "better" suggest from Nathan. Pretty
cool.
I'm wondering if it would make more sense to implement THRIFT-187 and then use
the set to do the validation. Instead of max(n) comparisons, you'd get exactly
one hash and one comparison. It'd really be killing two birds with one stone.
> Validate method should check that enum types are assigned valid values
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-224
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-224
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Compiler (Ruby)
> Reporter: Nathan Marz
> Assignee: Piotr Kozikowski
> Attachments: thrift-224.patch
>
>
> The validate method generated currently checks that required fields are set.
> It would be nice if it were to enforce more parts of the schema. One example
> of this are the values assigned to enum types. For example, if I have this
> enum:
> enum MyEnum {
> FOO = 1;
> BAR = 3;
> BAZ = 4;
> BIZ = 5;
> }
> and this struct:
> struct MyStruct {
> MyEnum e;
> }
> The validate method would ensure that MyStruct#e is either 1, 3, 4, or 5.
> The naive way of implementing this would be to generate a conditional
> statement for every value, aka
> "e==1 || e==3 || e==4 || e==5"
> A better implementation would generate something like:
> "e==1 || (e>=3 && e<=5)"
> Since the common case seems to be having large ranges of contiguous values,
> this is the difference between having N conditionals execute versus 2.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
