4 ms·

Detailed (though perhaps biased) comparison I wrote up a few months ago: http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/news/2014-06-17-capnproto-flatbuffers-sbe.html http

by kentonv 12y ago

Detailed (though perhaps biased) comparison I wrote up a few months ago: http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/news/2014-06-17-capnproto-flatbuffers-sbe.html http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/news/2014-06-17-capnproto...

halayli 12y ago
I found it interesting that they didn't benchmark it against capnproto (http://google.github.io/flatbuffers/md__benchmarks.html http://google.github.io/flatbuffers/md__benchmarks.html)
- bch 12y ago
  Apparently Cap'n Proto doesn't build with MSs compiler[1]. Does it build on Windows (where the benchmarks were performed [2]) at all? [1] http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/news/2014-06-17-capnproto-flatbuffers-sbe.html http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/news/2014-06-17-capnproto... (see feature matrix) [2]http://google.github.io/flatbuffers/md__benchmarks.html http://google.github.io/flatbuffers/md__benchmarks.html (introduction/top of article)
  - kentonv 12y ago
    It builds in Cygwin -- not that I'd expect typical Windows developers to be satisfied by that. MinGW and limited MSVC support will come soon.
tbastos 12y ago
Even though capnproto would be our first choice, the lack of support for Windows/CMake is kind of a party killer. FlatBuffers doesn't offer everything we need either, but its codebase is simpler to grasp and hack, so it may end up being the safer choice... which is unfortunate
- kentonv 12y ago
  I'm trying to get basic MSVC support into version 0.5.0, which is planned for release in late November. The reflection and dynamic APIs probably won't be supported initially because too much would have to be rewritten to work around missing C++11 features in MSVC -- they'll come online as soon as MSVC adds support. But, most common use cases don't need them anyway. 0.5.0 will also feature cmake support (this is already in git).

4 ms·

Detailed (though perhaps biased) comparison I wrote up a few months ago: http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/news/2014-06-17-capnproto-flatbuffers-sbe.html http

by kentonv 12y ago

halayli 12y ago
I found it interesting that they didn't benchmark it against capnproto (http://google.github.io/flatbuffers/md__benchmarks.html http://google.github.io/flatbuffers/md__benchmarks.html)
- bch 12y ago
  Apparently Cap'n Proto doesn't build with MSs compiler[1]. Does it build on Windows (where the benchmarks were performed [2]) at all? [1] http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/news/2014-06-17-capnproto-flatbuffers-sbe.html http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/news/2014-06-17-capnproto... (see feature matrix) [2]http://google.github.io/flatbuffers/md__benchmarks.html http://google.github.io/flatbuffers/md__benchmarks.html (introduction/top of article)
  - kentonv 12y ago
    It builds in Cygwin -- not that I'd expect typical Windows developers to be satisfied by that. MinGW and limited MSVC support will come soon.
tbastos 12y ago
Even though capnproto would be our first choice, the lack of support for Windows/CMake is kind of a party killer. FlatBuffers doesn't offer everything we need either, but its codebase is simpler to grasp and hack, so it may end up being the safer choice... which is unfortunate
- kentonv 12y ago
  I'm trying to get basic MSVC support into version 0.5.0, which is planned for release in late November. The reflection and dynamic APIs probably won't be supported initially because too much would have to be rewritten to work around missing C++11 features in MSVC -- they'll come online as soon as MSVC adds support. But, most common use cases don't need them anyway. 0.5.0 will also feature cmake support (this is already in git).