Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Investigate pre-generating Rust protobuf code #98

Closed
hug-dev opened this issue Jan 27, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #117
Closed

Investigate pre-generating Rust protobuf code #98

hug-dev opened this issue Jan 27, 2021 · 1 comment · Fixed by #117
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers medium Effort label

Comments

@hug-dev
Copy link
Member

hug-dev commented Jan 27, 2021

Similarly as the discussion about this topic on the Go client PR, we should investigate if it's good and worth it to pre-generate the code from our protobuf files and check it in tree instead of generating it for everybuild.

Since our contracts are stable and backward-compatible by design, the main advantage of this is winning compilation time by requiring less build step and less dependencies. Seeing the number of times those files are generated, I am sure we could see a huge advantage.

The protobuf code could be generated under a feature disabled by default (by default use the pre-generated one) and the CI could check that the generated code is the one we expect.

@hug-dev hug-dev added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 27, 2021
@ionut-arm ionut-arm added the medium Effort label label Feb 3, 2021
@hug-dev hug-dev added the good first issue Good for newcomers label Apr 29, 2021
@hug-dev
Copy link
Member Author

hug-dev commented Apr 29, 2021

Putting it as "good-first-issue" as I think we can just go with it and pre-generate the contracts.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers medium Effort label
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants