thrift-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rush Manbert <r...@manbert.com>
Subject Re: Some thoughts about changes to Thrift
Date Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:00:53 GMT
I don't use any command line tools that are Java-based, so I'm  
speaking from lack of experience here. :-)

IMHO, a major feature of any tool implementation is that it be easy to  
integrate into user's build environments on all supported platforms.  
In my case, this means that I need use the tool from a Xcode project  
and also from a Visual Studio project. When we eventually support  
Linux, then I guess I'l need to use in a big Makefile-based set of  
projects. It may mean that I need to write appropriate makefiles and  
use the make-flavor of project that Xcode and VS support. On the Mac,  
in particular, this is important because I can make my library project  
that uses Thrift depend on the project that generates the sources  
using the compiler.

So what I'm saying is please take this into consideration when picking  
the cross-platform language to use for rewriting the compiler. My  
personal choice would be Python, because it's nice and clean to use  
from the command line, there are template engines available for it,  
and installing Python on Windows is pretty easy. But if a Java-based  
tool has all the same characteristics, then go for it.

- Rush

On Mar 6, 2009, at 8:02 AM, Bryan Duxbury wrote:

> It seems like there's some consensus on a JavaCC based compiler.  
> Should we open an JIRA issue and start to explore feasibility?
> -Bryan
>
> On Mar 6, 2009, at 3:03 AM, Esteve Fernandez wrote:
>
>> On Friday 06 March 2009 03:24:23 Mark Slee wrote:
>>> That's pretty much my fault.
>>
>> Actually the current Thrift compiler served its puporse quite  
>> decently, but
>> the coming of new languages and features has made it (along with the
>> generators) a bit more complex and less easy to maintain.
>>
>>> I personally like Java and think it'd be a decent choice, but  
>>> there do seem
>>> to be a decent number of people out there building services who  
>>> seem to
>>> vehemently hate Java. Lots of *nix systems do not have a JVM or JDK
>>> installed by default -- and it's pretty annoying for users who  
>>> aren't
>>> writing services in Java to have to install it to build the  
>>> compiler.
>>
>> I'd argue for writing a parser in Java and use a template engine  
>> (Velocity,
>> Freemarker, etc.). Why not Python? Dunno :-) I think Java is more  
>> widely
>> deployed, it has better tools for scanning and parsing and more  
>> developers.
>> Etch, another incubating project with similar goals to Thrift, uses  
>> JavaCC
>> for parsing and Velocity as template engine for its compiler and  
>> generators,
>> even though it also emits C#
>>
>> Using a template engine would make development of new features and  
>> the
>> inclusion of more languages much easier. Instead of having to hack a
>> generator to add some new feature, we could simply supply a new  
>> template
>> file. For example, at some point in the future I'd like to build a  
>> generator
>> for Javascript, and if we used a template engine, it would be a  
>> matter of
>> writing a minimal generator and a bunch of templates.
>>
>> Cheers.


Mime
View raw message