www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Anyone have D protobuf?

reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
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.
Oct 20 2012
parent reply "Chris Nicholson-Sauls" <ibisbasenji gmail.com> writes:
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
Oct 20 2012
next sibling parent reply "1100110" <0b1100110 gmail.com> writes:
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
Oct 20 2012
parent reply Matt Soucy <msoucy csh.rit.edu> writes:
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.
Oct 20 2012
parent "Chris Nicholson-Sauls" <ibisbasenji gmail.com> writes:
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



 Oct 20 2012



prev sibling  parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com>  writes:


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.



 Oct 20 2012



  parent  Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com>  writes:


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



 Oct 21 2012