Thread overview | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
October 20, 2012 Anyone have D protobuf? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Not a big deal, but does anyone have or know of a usable up-to-date protocol buffers implementation for D? All I've found is this: https://256.makerslocal.org/wiki/index.php/ProtocolBuffer But it's old, says its status is only "mid-implementation", has no license info, and I think it might be D1. |
October 21, 2012 Re: Anyone have D protobuf? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Nick Sabalausky | On Saturday, 20 October 2012 at 07:28:07 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > Not a big deal, but does anyone have or know of a usable up-to-date > protocol buffers implementation for D? All I've found is this: > > https://256.makerslocal.org/wiki/index.php/ProtocolBuffer > > But it's old, says its status is only "mid-implementation", has no > license info, and I think it might be D1. It has been started at least three times that I know of, but I don't think anyone ever finished such a beast (I'm guilty of one of those myself). But in related news, in case it fits what you're hoping to do, I've written a binding, and am in the process of a wrapper, for zeroMQ: https://github.com/csauls/DZMQ It is usable in the simplest sense as is; so maybe if you're willing to roll your own object<->string conversions, this would be a start. -- Chris Nicholson-Sauls |
October 21, 2012 Re: Anyone have D protobuf? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Chris Nicholson-Sauls | On Sunday, 21 October 2012 at 00:13:30 UTC, Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote: > On Saturday, 20 October 2012 at 07:28:07 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> Not a big deal, but does anyone have or know of a usable up-to-date >> protocol buffers implementation for D? All I've found is this: >> >> https://256.makerslocal.org/wiki/index.php/ProtocolBuffer >> >> But it's old, says its status is only "mid-implementation", has no >> license info, and I think it might be D1. > > It has been started at least three times that I know of, but I don't think anyone ever finished such a beast (I'm guilty of one of those myself). But in related news, in case it fits what you're hoping to do, I've written a binding, and am in the process of a wrapper, for zeroMQ: https://github.com/csauls/DZMQ > > It is usable in the simplest sense as is; so maybe if you're willing to roll your own object<->string conversions, this would be a start. > > -- Chris Nicholson-Sauls Hey man, If it helps you out: steal anything you want from these. I didn't check how far along you were, soo... yeah. https://github.com/1100110/CZMQ https://github.com/1100110/ZeroMQ |
October 21, 2012 [OT] ZeroMQ (Was: Anyone have D protobuf?) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Chris Nicholson-Sauls | On Sun, 21 Oct 2012 02:13:30 +0200
"Chris Nicholson-Sauls" <ibisbasenji@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, 20 October 2012 at 07:28:07 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > Not a big deal, but does anyone have or know of a usable
> > up-to-date
> > protocol buffers implementation for D? All I've found is this:
> >
> > https://256.makerslocal.org/wiki/index.php/ProtocolBuffer
> >
> > But it's old, says its status is only "mid-implementation", has
> > no
> > license info, and I think it might be D1.
>
> It has been started at least three times that I know of, but I don't think anyone ever finished such a beast (I'm guilty of one of those myself). But in related news, in case it fits what you're hoping to do, I've written a binding, and am in the process of a wrapper, for zeroMQ: https://github.com/csauls/DZMQ
>
> It is usable in the simplest sense as is; so maybe if you're willing to roll your own object<->string conversions, this would be a start.
>
I just needed message packing/unpacking, and it looks like that's outside the scope of ZeroMQ, so that's not really what I needed.
But ZeroMQ does look really good though, maybe I *should* have been looking for it ;) I may consider using it, but my biggest concern is that I can't find anything about using it for UDP-style "Fast as possible *without* worrying about dropped, out-of-order, or duplicated packets." Because some of my data will be of that nature. If it had that *and* optional encryption (comparable with HTTPS/SSL/TLS) for some (although not all) messages, then I'd be *totally* sold on it.
|
October 21, 2012 [OT] ZeroMQ (Was: Anyone have D protobuf?) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to 1100110 | On 10/20/2012 09:55 PM, 1100110 wrote:
> On Sunday, 21 October 2012 at 00:13:30 UTC, Chris Nicholson-Sauls
> wrote:
>> On Saturday, 20 October 2012 at 07:28:07 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> Not a big deal, but does anyone have or know of a usable up-to-date
>>> protocol buffers implementation for D? All I've found is this:
>>>
>>> https://256.makerslocal.org/wiki/index.php/ProtocolBuffer
>>>
>>> But it's old, says its status is only "mid-implementation", has no
>>> license info, and I think it might be D1.
>>
>> It has been started at least three times that I know of, but I don't
>> think anyone ever finished such a beast (I'm guilty of one of those
>> myself). But in related news, in case it fits what you're hoping to
>> do, I've written a binding, and am in the process of a wrapper, for
>> zeroMQ: https://github.com/csauls/DZMQ
>>
>> It is usable in the simplest sense as is; so maybe if you're willing
>> to roll your own object<->string conversions, this would be a start.
>>
>> -- Chris Nicholson-Sauls
> Hey man, If it helps you out: steal anything you want from these.
> I didn't check how far along you were, soo... yeah.
>
>
> https://github.com/1100110/CZMQ
> https://github.com/1100110/ZeroMQ
>
Huh. I've also been writing a D wrapper for 0mq. As it is right now, though, it's really just OOP wrappers for the Deimos bindings, because I figured that it would be easiest. I should check out the CZMQ stuff you have and see if any of it is something that I would find useful for my projects.
|
October 21, 2012 Re: [OT] ZeroMQ (Was: Anyone have D protobuf?) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Matt Soucy | On Sunday, 21 October 2012 at 02:34:03 UTC, Matt Soucy wrote: > On 10/20/2012 09:55 PM, 1100110 wrote: >> On Sunday, 21 October 2012 at 00:13:30 UTC, Chris Nicholson-Sauls >> wrote: >>> On Saturday, 20 October 2012 at 07:28:07 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: >>>> Not a big deal, but does anyone have or know of a usable up-to-date >>>> protocol buffers implementation for D? All I've found is this: >>>> >>>> https://256.makerslocal.org/wiki/index.php/ProtocolBuffer >>>> >>>> But it's old, says its status is only "mid-implementation", has no >>>> license info, and I think it might be D1. >>> >>> It has been started at least three times that I know of, but I don't >>> think anyone ever finished such a beast (I'm guilty of one of those >>> myself). But in related news, in case it fits what you're hoping to >>> do, I've written a binding, and am in the process of a wrapper, for >>> zeroMQ: https://github.com/csauls/DZMQ >>> >>> It is usable in the simplest sense as is; so maybe if you're willing >>> to roll your own object<->string conversions, this would be a start. >>> >>> -- Chris Nicholson-Sauls >> Hey man, If it helps you out: steal anything you want from these. >> I didn't check how far along you were, soo... yeah. >> >> >> https://github.com/1100110/CZMQ >> https://github.com/1100110/ZeroMQ I'll definitely look through CZMQ once I get a little further with what I already have planned. Thanks. >> > Huh. I've also been writing a D wrapper for 0mq. As it is right now, though, it's really just OOP wrappers for the Deimos bindings, because I figured that it would be easiest. I should check out the CZMQ stuff you have and see if any of it is something that I would find useful for my projects. Up until about a week ago, I didn't even know about zeromq. ;) A friend of mine requested that I write this, because the company he works for (iostudio.com) might then consider using D for some in-house work. Crossing fingers, for D's sake. Since I'm writing my wrapper as per his request, we might end up with very different products. Competition is a good thing, right? Researching and working on this leads me to think I'm going to want to use zeromq quite a bit myself, going forward. -- Chris Nicholson-Sauls |
October 21, 2012 Re: [OT] ZeroMQ (Was: Anyone have D protobuf?) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Nick Sabalausky | On 2012-10-21 03:55, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > But ZeroMQ does look really good though, maybe I *should* have been > looking for it ;) I may consider using it, but my biggest concern is > that I can't find anything about using it for UDP-style "Fast as > possible *without* worrying about dropped, out-of-order, or duplicated > packets." Because some of my data will be of that nature. If it had > that *and* optional encryption (comparable with HTTPS/SSL/TLS) for some > (although not all) messages, then I'd be *totally* sold on it. Don't know if curl supports encryption but otherwise Tango has support for SSL. -- /Jacob Carlborg |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation