|
|
|
|
|
|
by xyzzy_plugh
1659 days ago
|
|
|
I don't disagree with anything you're saying but I believe you're missing the forest for the trees. The problem I see Buf and other companies trying to solve isn't RPC so much as IDL. Defining and managing schemas is incredibly painful. It doesn't matter if it's a remote network call, HTTP, binary blob over a socket, files on disk or a call to a local function. Defining, sharing and consuming the boundaries -- the interfaces -- rigorously is the painful part. You're too caught up on the implementation details. If you solve the IDL problems, then you can simply change the implementation and no one is the wiser. grpc-gateway is maybe a good example? > exactly what ASN.1 does Okay I actually do disagree with this. ASN.1 is a whole different ballgame. What doesn't it do, besides the obvious complications leading to buggy and insecure implementations every other day? Please don't use ASN.1 |
|
|