quick-protobuf
protobuf-conformance
| quick-protobuf | protobuf-conformance | |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | 1 | |
| 432 | 20 | |
| - | - | |
| 6.3 | 8.4 | |
| 3 months ago | about 18 hours ago | |
| Rust | JavaScript | |
| MIT License | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
quick-protobuf
-
Fivefold Slower Compared to Go? Optimizing Rust's Protobuf Decoding Performance
[quick-protobuf]: https://github.com/tafia/quick-protobuf
-
Add extra stuff to a “standard” encoding? Sure, why not
I actually went through all projects listed in [1] because I remember this very quirk. It turns out that there are many such libraries that have two variants of encode/decode functions, where the second variant prepends a varint length. In my brief inspection there do exist a few libraries with only the second variant (e.g. Rust quick-protobuf), which is legitimately problematic [2].
But if the project in question was indeed protobuf.js (see loeg's comments), it clearly distinguishes encode/decode vs. encodeDelimited/decodeDelimited. So I believe the project should not be blamed, and the better question would be why so many people chose to add this exact helper. Well, because Google itself also had the same helper [3]! So at this point protobuf should just standardize this simple framing format (with an explicitly different name though), instead of claiming that protobuf has no obligation to define one.
[1] https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/main/docs/t...
[2] https://github.com/tafia/quick-protobuf/issues/130
[3] https://protobuf.dev/reference/java/api-docs/com/google/prot...
[4] https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/main/src/go...
protobuf-conformance
-
Add extra stuff to a “standard” encoding? Sure, why not
It looks like Protobuf actually has a test suite to ensure compliance with the protocol:
https://github.com/bufbuild/protobuf-conformance
Seems like a good idea for protocols in general to have an official test suite, as a way to address this problem
What are some alternatives?
riegeli - Riegeli/records is a file format for storing a sequence of string records, typically serialized protocol buffers.
msgpack - MessagePack is an extremely efficient object serialization library. It's like JSON, but very fast and small.
protobuf - Protocol Buffers for JavaScript (& TypeScript).
nix-init - Generate Nix packages from URLs with hash prefetching, dependency inference, license detection, and more [maintainer=@figsoda]
material-ui - MUI Core (formerly Material UI) is the React UI library you always wanted. Follow your own design system, or start with Material Design. [Moved to: https://github.com/mui/material-ui]
imstr - Immutable strings, in Rust.
Protobuf - Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format
compactr - Schema based serialization made easy
flapigen-rs - Tool for connecting programs or libraries written in Rust with other languages
material-ui - MUI Core (formerly Material UI) is the React UI library you always wanted. Follow your own design system, or start with Material Design. [Moved to: https://github.com/mui/material-ui]