thrift-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konrad Grochowski <>
Subject Re: Thrift in an embedded setting
Date Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:55:13 GMT
Hey Tomas,

I'll try to merge/rebase it against master and include recent changes in 
c++ lib into c++ v2 lib, probably this weekend (I hope I'll find some time).

As for C++11 - quick answer: because then at some point Thrift would 
have to introduce std17 or std14 etc :)
Long answer - when I started my branch there was some discussion which 
lead to following - Thrift should have one C++ library for "the best of 
modern C++", which should be updated along with new compilers, new 
language and library features etc. This library should be named cpp v2 
to not mix with any current new versions of C++ standard, as we want 
Thrift to be able to make this library compatible with current newest 
standard, be it std11 or std23. At some point this library should become 
standard (--gen cpp) and most new users should be happy. Current c++ 
library should be kept as "most common subset of C++ compilers features" 
library, to enable Thrift on some older or outdated environments. As for 
keeping multiple libs for cpp11, cpp14, cpp17 etc - it would just add 
too big maintenance cost to Thrift.

Best regards,

W dniu 2016-01-12 o 17:24, 刘畅 pisze:
> Dear Konrad,
> It’s exciting to see the effort here.
> I’ve checked your branch and it’s really a little out of date.
> Why not merge the modification lately and let’s plan it out together?
> as for the generator, is it nice to call it cpp_v2? why not just use cpp version instead?
> such as “—gen cpp_std11 ”
> Best regard,
> Tomas
>> 在 2016年1月12日,下午5:37,Konrad Grochowski <>
>> Hey All,
>> Few thoughts from previous discussion about C++ >= 11:
>> - we have to keep old C++ lib (at least for a while) as C++11 lib would break iface
>> - to avoid confusion at some point we agreed to use cpp_v2 name for new lib, so no
user would ask "What is C++2?" (it's not perfect solution, still at least it's some solution).
Current C++ lib should be renamed to cpp_v1, and "--gen cpp" should be an alias for cpp_v1,
and later (1.0? 1.1? 2.0?) changed to cpp_v2 (keeping v1 for backward compatibility)
>> As for my branch:
>> - it is probably a little bit outdated (haven't merged or rebased it for a while)
>> - does not include CMake build files
>> - Contains full copy of cpp_v1 lib, but with std::shared_ptr and std::thread instead
of boost counterparts (boost usage is reduced significantly).
>> - Optional fields are now using boost::optional (we need to check - maybe some compilers
already support C++17 std::optional, so we could switch to that - C++17 will probably be released,
before cpp_v2 become standard :) )
>> - I've simplified ThreadManager, but it's not tested
>> - while writing compiler I stopped at generating Processors and I think that's the
last thing that is missing.
>> Best regards,
>> Konrad
>> W dniu 2016-01-12 o 00:12, Roger Meier pisze:
>>> Yes Randy, that's it!
>>> I just found another issue about std::shared_ptr
>>> We can easily switch to boost-less code generation in place within the
>>> compiler by using the new, modular and testable code from Konrad and
>>> fine tune the C++ library for bare metal systems via CMake.
>>> good afternoon, good evening, and good night!
>>> -roger
>>> PS: good morning ;-)
>>> Quoting Randy Abernethy <>:
>>>> Most boost usage in Thrift is header based. The C++ lib "API" today uses
>>>> boost::shared_ptr liberally and there are lots of other small incursions.
>>>> While the elegance of Boost is uncontested, it is another dependency and
>>>> far as the Thrift C++ lib is concerned, it is redundant in the context of
>>>> C++ >= 11. There are also boost thread bits which are lib based. Again
>>>> can work around this stuff but it is much easier, and at no cost of
>>>> functionality, to just use C++11 these days.
>>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Stuart Reynolds <>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Just out of interest, what's the nature of Thrift's dependency on Boost?
>>>>> My recollection (also from embedded systems), is that *much* (but not
>>>>> all) of Boost doesn't cause any real library dependencies because so
>>>>> much of the Boost code is provided in full as template in header files
>>>>> (i.e. it does not necessarily generate linker dependencies on boost
>>>>> libraries).
>>>>> Is this the case for Thrift's use of boost? Does it require some
>>>>> linking against a boost library -- and could that dependency be cut?
>>>>> - Stu
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Randy Abernethy
>>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>>> Hey Roger,
>>>>>> I agree with the goal. However I think the easiest way to start is
with a
>>>>>> new base (--gen cpp2). In this way we can get something in place
>>>>> those
>>>>>> who need it now and then we can excommunicate the old lib whenever
>>>>>> community is ok with it. The changes contemplated break the API,
>>>>>> something we can just do to the old C++ lib without harming a lot
>>>>> folks.
>>>>>> -Randy
>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Roger Meier <>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi all
>>>>>>> I think we should rework the existing cpp towards modern C++
to awoid a
>>>>>>> second lib and generator to maintain.
>>>>>>> The cpp_v2 branch from Konrad is a great place to start, the
>>>>>>> modularization and testability is awesome!
>>>>>>> As we decided to base on modern C++ such as C++11, I would like
>>>>>>> replace the existing ccp lib and generator instead of adding
>>>>> one.
>>>>>>> I guess this might also enable Thrift on bare metal with C++
>>>>>>> best!
>>>>>>> -roger
>>>>>>> Quoting Konrad Grochowski <>:
>>>>>>> Hi Randy,
>>>>>>>> Do you think we could somehow merge our cpp2 efforts? (
>>>>>>>> It's my old branch, had to put it on little hiatus, yet I
think some
>>>>>>>> parts of it could be useful.
>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>> Konrad
>>>>>>>> W dniu 11.01.2016 o 20:16, Randy Abernethy pisze:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Dane and Tomas,
>>>>>>>>> Great to hear we have a few people willing to pull the
oars. I'll get
>>>>> our
>>>>>>>>> cpp2 lib sanitized this week and post a jira/patch in
a few days.
>>>>> Then we
>>>>>>>>> can take it from there.
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>> Randy
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Dane Mason <>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hey Randy,
>>>>>>>>>> That sounds perfect for our use case. I would love
to contribute.
>>>>> Let me
>>>>>>>>>> know when you have more details.
>>>>>>>>>> Dane
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Randy Abernethy
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hey Dane,
>>>>>>>>>>> My shop has a C++11 (no boost) language implementation
for thrift.
>>>>> We
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>>>>> only built out the generator (--gen cpp2) TBinaryProtocol,
>>>>>>>>>>> TCompactProtocol, framing and basic socket transports.
I have tried
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>>>> some help cleaning this up for public consumption
but so far no
>>>>> takers.
>>>>>>>>>>> Also other quarters have threatened to post such
a code base which
>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>> caused us to hold off (don't want multiple versions
of this stuff in
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> trunk). If you are willing to contribute I'll
try to package things
>>>>> up
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>> a commit this week so that we can get the community
to pitch in and
>>>>>>>>>> finish
>>>>>>>>>>> off a basic C++11 lib. Should work great for
your purposes (which is
>>>>>>>>>>> exactly what we use it for).
>>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>> Randy
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 6:20 PM, Dane Mason <>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry I should have been more clear. C++ is fine,
but the boost
>>>>>>>>>>> dependency
>>>>>>>>>>>> is problematic.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dane
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, January 9, 2016, Randy Abernethy
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you need a C impel or can you use C++11
on the embedded sys?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, January 9, 2016, Dane Mason
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, I'm part of a project that makes
heavy use of Thrift and it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> RPC
>>>>>>>>>>> functionality across Java, C++, and Python. This
project now needs
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> incorporate an embedded component with 256kb
ram running on a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CortexM3.
>>>>>>>>>>>> After a bit of research, I've decided that
there is no straight
>>>>>>>>>>>>> forward
>>>>>>>>>>>> way
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of using Thrift in this context out
of the box. We are not
>>>>> willing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> bring
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GLib in as a dependency, nor are
we willing to use C++ and Boost.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>> simply need is a way to reuse the binary
protocol and most
>>>>>>>>>>>>> importantly,
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IDL used throughout the rest of the
project. We are using many
>>>>>>>>>>>>> large
>>>>>>>>>>> structs, so maintaining 4 hand written implementations
across our 4
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> languages doesn't make sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some solutions I've considered:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Manually write code serialize
and deserialize the thrift
>>>>> binary
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> protocol.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - We are dealing with many large
structs, and ensuring
>>>>> correctness
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> handwritten code is tedious and error
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Use a JSON protocol and use existing
JSON parsers on the C
>>>>> side.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Again error prone, may not be performant
enough for our use
>>>>> case.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. *Possibly *create something like
a "TFlatBufferProtocol"  (or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Serialization format with an IDL)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - I haven't looked into this in depth,
it seems messy and hard to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd appreciate any advice you all
have to offer here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dane
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> Ta wiadomość została sprawdzona na obecność wirusów
>>>>> oprogramowanie
>>>>>>>> antywirusowe Avast.

View raw message