4 ms·

I'm wondering how do you share you shared types between languages if there's no schema ?

by mlhamel 11mo ago

athorax 11mo ago
I am confused on this as well, they list polyglot teams[0] as their top use case and consider not needing schema files a feature [0] https://fory.apache.org/blog/2025/10/29/fory_rust_versatile_serialization_framework/#-ideal-use-cases https://fory.apache.org/blog/2025/10/29/fory_rust_versatile_...
kenhwang 11mo ago
Looks like there's a type mapping chart for supported types: https://fory.apache.org/docs/docs/guide/xlang_type_mapping https://fory.apache.org/docs/docs/guide/xlang_type_mapping Otherwise, the schema seems to be derived from the class being serialized for typed languages, or otherwise annotated in code. The serializer and deserializer code must be manually written to be compatible instead of both sides being codegen'd to match from a schema file. He's the example I found for python: https://fory.apache.org/docs/docs/guide/python_serialization#cross-language-sserialization https://fory.apache.org/docs/docs/guide/python_serialization...
- chaokunyang 11mo ago
  You don’t need to hand‑write serializer code. In typed languages you just define your class or struct as usual; in dynamic languages you can use type hints. When running in compatible mode, Fory automatically derives a compact schema from those definitions at runtime time and sends it along to peers for the first time serialization. That way, both sides know the structure without needing a separate schema file. The idea is to make cross‑language exchange work out‑of‑the‑box, while still allowing teams to add an explicit IDL later if they want a single source of truth.
  - IshKebab 11mo ago
    He's saying you need to hand-write the class or struct. You don't need to do that in systems with an explicit schema like Protobuf.
    - mlhamel 11mo ago
      Exactly, i'm using protobuf, i've got those proto files which generate code in python, ruby, go and typescript. I can share the package into those different services and i'm gonna be sure i'll use common interface. It's not clear for me how to achieve the same with fory?
fabiensanglard 11mo ago
Not explaining this case makes me wonder how much this lib is actually used in production. This was also the first question I asked myself.
- chaokunyang 11mo ago
  This is our first release for Fory Rust. The Java and Python bindings has been used widely. You can see from https://fory.apache.org/user https://fory.apache.org/user
stmw 11mo ago
I am skeptical that it's possible to make this work in the long run.
- chaokunyang 11mo ago
  I get your concern — for one or two languages, skipping an IDL can work well and keeps things simple. But once you’re dealing with three or more languages, I agree an IDL becomes valuable as a single source of truth. That’s work we’ve started: adding optional IDL support so teams can generate data structures in each language from one shared definition.

I'm wondering how do you share you shared types between languages if there's no schema ?

by mlhamel 11mo ago

I'm wondering how do you share you shared types between languages if there's no schema ?

I am confused on this as well, they list polyglot teams[0] as their top use case and consider not needing schema files a feature [0] https://fory.apache.org/blog/2025/10/29/fory_rust_versatile_serialization_framework/#-ideal-use-cases https://fory.apache.org/blog/2025/10/29/fory_rust_versatile_...

kenhwang 11mo ago

Looks like there's a type mapping chart for supported types: https://fory.apache.org/docs/docs/guide/xlang_type_mapping https://fory.apache.org/docs/docs/guide/xlang_type_mapping Otherwise, the schema seems to be derived from the class being serialized for typed languages, or otherwise annotated in code. The serializer and deserializer code must be manually written to be compatible instead of both sides being codegen'd to match from a schema file. He's the example I found for python: https://fory.apache.org/docs/docs/guide/python_serialization#cross-language-sserialization https://fory.apache.org/docs/docs/guide/python_serialization...

chaokunyang 11mo ago
You don’t need to hand‑write serializer code. In typed languages you just define your class or struct as usual; in dynamic languages you can use type hints. When running in compatible mode, Fory automatically derives a compact schema from those definitions at runtime time and sends it along to peers for the first time serialization. That way, both sides know the structure without needing a separate schema file. The idea is to make cross‑language exchange work out‑of‑the‑box, while still allowing teams to add an explicit IDL later if they want a single source of truth.
- IshKebab 11mo ago
  He's saying you need to hand-write the class or struct. You don't need to do that in systems with an explicit schema like Protobuf.
  - mlhamel 11mo ago
    Exactly, i'm using protobuf, i've got those proto files which generate code in python, ruby, go and typescript. I can share the package into those different services and i'm gonna be sure i'll use common interface. It's not clear for me how to achieve the same with fory?

fabiensanglard 11mo ago

Not explaining this case makes me wonder how much this lib is actually used in production. This was also the first question I asked myself.

chaokunyang 11mo ago
This is our first release for Fory Rust. The Java and Python bindings has been used widely. You can see from https://fory.apache.org/user https://fory.apache.org/user

stmw 11mo ago

I am skeptical that it's possible to make this work in the long run.

chaokunyang 11mo ago
I get your concern — for one or two languages, skipping an IDL can work well and keeps things simple. But once you’re dealing with three or more languages, I agree an IDL becomes valuable as a single source of truth. That’s work we’ve started: adding optional IDL support so teams can generate data structures in each language from one shared definition.