Yongshun Ye comments

Results 50 comments of


                                            Yongshun Ye

Support polymorphic subclass serializers with inferred type arguments by refactoring `Serializer`s to bind to `KType`s instead of / in addition to `KClass`s

@sandwwraith Thank you for your detailed explanations. I went through the code again and rethought some of the designs. For the complications you mentioned, I still have some questions and...

Support polymorphic subclass serializers with inferred type arguments by refactoring `Serializer`s to bind to `KType`s instead of / in addition to `KClass`s

> The problem is that for deserialization it isn't enough. > The challenge is when the type parameter is polymorphic as polymorphic serialization erases the subtypes (there is one polymorphic...

Support I/O stream for protobuf format

A vote for this. One question: why don't you open a pull request or draft pull request for this? it can make reviewing changes easier. And an immature suggestion: can...

Support I/O stream for protobuf format

Hi @GeorgePap-719, thanks for asking. I mainly care about **multiplatform** support now. Suspending support can be an extra bonus but I don't need it urgently. > Usually these kind of...

Support I/O stream for protobuf format

On second thought about this, I would say that my main concern is multiplatform support and Coroutines support is not that important at all. Serializing large messages is a rare...

Support specifying the proto integer types for integer collections

> I don't mind reusing `@ProtoType`, it semantics seem to be still reasonable. OK. > However, it is not clear what to do with nested arrays (e.g. `List` — if...

Can't encode a nullable `ByteArray` without a default argument in Protobuf (it currently maps to Protobuf `bytes`, so should not be treated as a Protobuf collection type and should be allowed to be optional)

@shanshin Thanks. It works! However, I would still wish that there be an annotation to distinguish them explicitly.

Can't encode a nullable `ByteArray` without a default argument in Protobuf (it currently maps to Protobuf `bytes`, so should not be treated as a Protobuf collection type and should be allowed to be optional)

@sandwwraith Yeah, I am aware of this. I mean to distinguish such length-delimited data from a collection of data (`repeated` fields).

Can't encode a nullable `ByteArray` without a default argument in Protobuf (it currently maps to Protobuf `bytes`, so should not be treated as a Protobuf collection type and should be allowed to be optional)

Hi, I just reviewed this issue again. And now I realize that it's not necessary to support encoding a `repeated` field of `Byte`s as it just wastes space. In the...

Can't encode a nullable `ByteArray` without a default argument in Protobuf (it currently maps to Protobuf `bytes`, so should not be treated as a Protobuf collection type and should be allowed to be optional)

Sorry I made a mistake. What's in the issue description is still not resolved.