4 ms·
I quite like Protobuf definitions. I find them very easy to read and I love the fact I can distribute them to a bunch of different languages via a library. Are
by orf 4y ago
I quite like Protobuf definitions. I find them very easy to read and I love the fact I can distribute them to a bunch of different languages via a library.
Are these Google’s internal problems? Or, what google-internal problems do protobufs solve that nobody else needs to care about?
Edit: to your edit, I find it hard to see a different way to do things.
- vitiral 4y agoA different way: learn from protobufs, then design a new language from the ground up and define a spec very early.
- saalweachter 4y agoEh, I've been corrupted by a decade of working with protobufs, but I've ultimately settled on "protos are good enough". Maybe not perfect, maybe there are use cases and patterns where they totally suck, but they exist and are already being used and they generally get the job done. While a part of me will always want to spend time optimizing and carefully crafting the perfect system from the bits up, there are more interesting things to build on top of your serialization and RPC frameworks so I don't see any real value in spending more time creating a 15th standard.