Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format (grpc依赖)
https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/
You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
Josh Haberman
aa8db6ab5e
|
11 years ago | |
---|---|---|
benchmarks | 11 years ago | |
bindings | 11 years ago | |
dynasm | 12 years ago | |
examples | 13 years ago | |
tests | 11 years ago | |
tools | 11 years ago | |
upb | 11 years ago | |
.gitignore | 16 years ago | |
LICENSE | 14 years ago | |
Makefile | 11 years ago | |
README | 12 years ago | |
perf-regression-test.py | 14 years ago | |
perf-tests.sh | 13 years ago |
README
upb - a small, low-level protocol buffer library
For API documentation, see the header files.
To build (the core library is ANSI C99 and has no dependencies):
$ make
Other useful targets:
$ make test
$ make benchmark
$ make lua (requires lua libraries to be installed)
The tests and benchmarks have the following dependencies
(Ubuntu package names in parentheses):
- Google's protobuf compiler + libraries (protobuf-compiler, libprotobuf-dev)
- Lua binary and libraries (lua5.1, liblua5.1-dev)
Issue tracking is on Google Code:
http://code.google.com/p/upb/issues/list
A manual is forthcoming, for now see wiki docs at:
https://github.com/haberman/upb/wiki
API and ABI are both subject to change! Please do not distribute as a shared
library for this reason (for now at least).
TODO
====
The issue tracker contains small-to-medium tasks that need doing; but here are
the major things that are broken or not yet implemented yet:
- serialization isn't written yet (only deserialization)
C/C++ API
=========
upb's main interfaces are defined in .h files (like upb/def.h). These header
files are coded in such a way that they are not only compatible with C and C++
but provide idiomatic interfaces to both (functions for C, classes for C++).
Here is the general strategy/pattern for this. I'll explain it piece by piece.
// This defines a type called upb::Foo in C++ or upb_foo in C. In both cases
// there is a typedef for upb_foo, which is important since this is how the
// C functions are defined (which are exposed to both C and C++).
#ifdef __cplusplus
namespace upb { class Foo; }
typedef upb::Foo upb_foo;
extern "C" {
#else
struct upb_foo;
typedef struct upb_foo upb_foo;
#endif
// Here is the actual definition of the class/struct. In C++ we get a class
// called upb::Foo and in C we get a struct called "struct upb_foo", but both
// have the same members and the C++ version is "standard-layout" according
// to C++11. This means that the two should be compatible.
//
// In addition to being completely accessible from C, it also provides C++
// niceities like methods (instead of bare functions). We also get
// encapsulation in C++, even though this is impossible to provide in C. We
// provide all method documentation in the C++ class, since the class/method
// syntax is nicer to read than the bare functions of C.
#ifdef __cplusplus
class upb::Foo {
public:
// Method documentation for DoBar().
void DoBar(int32_t x);
// Method documentation for IsSpicy().
bool IsSpicy();
private:
#else
struct upb_foo {
#endif
int32_t private_member;
};
// Next follows the C API, which is how the functionality is actually
// implemented. We omit documentation here because everything was documented
// in the C++ class, and it's easy to match the functions 1:1 to the C++
// methods.
void upb_foo_dobar(upb_foo *f, int32_t x);
bool upb_foo_isspicy(upb_foo *f);
// Finally we include inline definitions of the C++ methods, which are nothing
// but this wrappers around the C functions. Since these are inline, the C++
// API imposes no overhead.
#ifdef __cplusplus
} // extern "C"
namespace upb {
inline void Foo::DoBar(int32_t x) { upb_foo_dobar(this, x); }
inline bool Foo::IsSpicy() { return upb_foo_isspicy(this); }
}
#endif
This scheme works pretty nicely. It adds a bit of noise to the header file, but
gives nice, zero-overhead APIs to both C and C++ without having to duplicate
the API documentation.
The biggest bummer is that there isn't any good way to use C++ inheritance
even for types which are trying to express inheritance in C. C++ just doesn't
give any guarantees about how it will arrange data members in base classes,
so we can't use C++ inheritance while interoperating with C layouts. The
biggest effect of this is that we can't get C++'s nice implicit upcasts; all
upcasts have to be explicit, which is a pain.
CONTACT
=======
Author: Josh Haberman (jhaberman@gmail.com, haberman@google.com)
See LICENSE for copyright information.