▲ | usrnm 6 days ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cap'n'proto is not very nice to work with in C++, and I'd discourage anyone from using it from other programming languages, the implementations are just not there yet. We use both cnp and protobufs at work, and I vastly prefer protobufs, even for C++. I only wish they stayed the hell away from abseil, though. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | yencabulator 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The developer experience of capnproto is pretty darn miserable. I replaced my Rust use of it with https://rkyv.org/ -- probably the biggest ergonomic improvement was a single validation after which the message is safe to look at, instead of errors on every code path. The biggest downside was loss of built-in per-message schema evolution; in my use case I can have one version number up front. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | porridgeraisin 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I always thought people had a positive view on abseil, never used it myself other than when tinkering on random projects. What's the main issue? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|