[nanomsg] Re: more updates
- From: Ondrej Kupka <ondra.cap@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: jimmy frasche <soapboxcicero@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 22:38:36 +0200
On Apr 22, 2014, at 10:23 PM, jimmy frasche wrote:
> oops, forgot reader/writer/interop.
>
> Yes there's definitely a mismatch and you could have the user just use
> bytes.Buffer.
>
> But as for interop, a great deal of the stdlib and community packages
> work with Reader and Writer so it's likely that many users would have
> to rig the bytes.Buffer together themselves.
>
> Providing it as a utility would reduce this duplication and likely
> avoid some common errors if not allow for optimizations with the
> underlying *Message facilities/caching.
> It would be nice to be able to Fprintf a message or copy a file into
> message or dump a message over http or even directly json decode a
> message without a ton of boilerplate.
Since from what I understand the messages here are just plain []byte thingies,
it could make sense to implement these helpers to get rid of all the annoying
boilerplate code. +1.
Other related posts:
