3 ms·
I've seen that too, but it's really only a big deal if you're doing something else smelly: Carrying the codegen'd proto objects throughout your application. Bet
by mumblemumble 7y ago
I've seen that too, but it's really only a big deal if you're doing something else smelly: Carrying the codegen'd proto objects throughout your application. Better to handle proto messages the same way you should be handling any interface with the outside world: Translate it into your code's own domain model, which can (and should) follow any idiom you like ASAP, and get on with your day.
- asdkhadsj 7y agoI think I agree with you, BUT I will say that it's a problem I just don't have with JSON. I think it's because JSON is inherently smaller, and the spec primarily focuses on basic types that handle data. With JSON I can write idiomatic code, in any language, and the translation to and from my code is correct. I don't need to abstract away my JSON code for arbitrary reasons, it works. I'm not sure why that is TBH, I just know that it's a restriction of Protobuf I don't find myself running into with JSON.