protobuf-es VS refute

Yes, you can. You are mistaking protobuf with gRPC. See this for more information.

You can use this with connect: https://github.com/bufbuild/protobuf-es

Ah you should check out https://github.com/bufbuild/protobuf-es which feels great so far. Then there's connect by the same buf people but it has a grpc-web option https://connect.build/docs/web/getting-started/. The amount of code generated is also tiny, which I love.

I'd recommend looking into protobuf-ts (Timo from Buf) or protobuf-es (Buf maintained).

Not sure if it is a magic bullet, but it was definitely written by TypeScript developers, for TypeScript developers.

The generated TypeScript code is already pretty minimal because all serialization ops are implemented with reflection instead of generated code (which is only marginally slower than generated code in JS).

But you can also switch to generating JavaScript + TypeScript declaration files, which is truly minimal: JavaScript is an entire dynamic language, so we actually only generated a small snippet of metadata in the .js output, and create a class at run time with a function call. The generated typings (.d.ts) give you type safety, autocompletion in the IDE, and so on.

You can see the output here: https://github.com/bufbuild/protobuf-es/blob/main/packages/p...

I find straight forward, dedicated combinators much more readable and practical to use ie. for iterables (context where it makes a lot of sense) [0] example [1], runtime assertions (through refutations, which are much faster than combinators over assertions) [2], parser combinators for smallish grammars [3] etc.

In many cases vanilla/imperative js is more readable and terse, no need to bring functional fanaticism everywhere, just in places where it gives true benefits and in form that can be understood by peers.

Functional code can be beautiful and can also be unreadable/undebugable. Same with imperative code. It's great in js/ts you can pick approach where the problem is expressed more naturally and mix it at will.

[0] https://github.com/preludejs/generator

[1] https://observablehq.com/@mirek/project-euler

[2] https://github.com/preludejs/refute

[3] https://github.com/preludejs/parser

We use jsonrpc over websockets in production for many years in trading services. It works very well. We use lightweight libraries that look like this [0] and this [1]. It's lightweight, fast, type safe, easy to maintain and debug etc.

[0] https://github.com/preludejs/jsonrpc

[1] https://github.com/preludejs/refute

Types can be asserted at runtime (parsed) at IO boundaries (reading http request or response, websocket message, parsing json file etc). Once they enter statically type system they don't need to be asserted again.

The difference it makes is illusion of type-safety vs type-safety this article touches on.

You can try to bind service with client somehow but in many cases this will fail in production as you can't guarantee paired versioning, due to normal situations by design of your architecture or temporary mid-deployment state or other team doing something they were not suppose to do etc. It's hard to avoid runtime parsing in general.

Functional combinators [0] or faster [1] with predicate/assert semantics work very well with typescript, which is very pleasant language to work with.

[0] https://github.com/appliedblockchain/assert-combinators

[1] https://github.com/preludejs/refute