You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As discussed in #44, to keep up with changes on machinetalk-protobuf it would be helpful to generate API code from protobuf definitions. This can be done once a base has been defined as described in #44.
Once the base is defined, we have a way to update several kinds of status objects (MT_FULL_UPDATE) and a way to call commands and request data (MT_REQ, MT_ACK, MT_NACK). These status objects and commands need to be defined in a way so that a generator can create code for Python, Javascript and C/C++.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
@bobvanderlinden This might be a little miss misunderstanding. I want to generate the code not from the protobuf spec but from a model for the protocol. However, this model should also be used to document the messages, as this is very essential for a protocol. My tests so far are very promising.
A single model can be used to create binding for various languages (just add a code generator) and documentation with a single model. If it works out that would drastically simplify creating new protocols with Machinetalk and maintaining them.
As discussed in #44, to keep up with changes on machinetalk-protobuf it would be helpful to generate API code from protobuf definitions. This can be done once a base has been defined as described in #44.
Once the base is defined, we have a way to update several kinds of status objects (
MT_FULL_UPDATE
) and a way to call commands and request data (MT_REQ
,MT_ACK
,MT_NACK
). These status objects and commands need to be defined in a way so that a generator can create code for Python, Javascript and C/C++.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: