Skip to content

Update vmihailenco/msgpack to v5 #97

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

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

oleggator
Copy link

Breaking change

Now msgpack encoded integers decodes to corresponding Golang integer type.
It's the behaviour of the new version of vmihailenco/msgpack library.

For example:
before: int8 msgpack encoded integer decodes to int64 Golang variable
now: int8 msgpack encoded integer decodes to int8 Golang variable

@funny-falcon
Copy link

First, it is breaking change, therefore it could not be merged before V2.
Second, I HATE THIS CHANGE in vmichailenco/msgpack. It is most stupid thing he could make with his library, and he did it indeed. This main thing I don't want to mess with newer versions of vmichailenco/msgpack and wish to replace it with something different.

@FZambia
Copy link

FZambia commented Jan 8, 2021

before: int8 msgpack encoded integer decodes to int64 Golang variable
now: int8 msgpack encoded integer decodes to int8 Golang variable

decoder.UseLooseInterfaceDecoding(true) should help I suppose?

@funny-falcon
Copy link

@FZambia hmm... looks promising.

@oleggator
Copy link
Author

oleggator commented Jan 11, 2021

Good idea.
But the behaviour still different from v2. In v5 fixed numbers decodes to int64, but in v2 positive fixed numbers decodes to uint64.

@FZambia
Copy link

FZambia commented Jan 11, 2021

Yeah, this is still a breaking change... But maybe this can help staying with vmihailenco/msgpack in go-tarantool next major release.

@ernado
Copy link

ernado commented May 12, 2021

We need msgpack.RawMessage support and going to maintain internal fork until this is merged.

@Totktonada
Copy link
Member

This work is continued in PR #174.

@Totktonada Totktonada closed this Jun 10, 2022
@Totktonada Totktonada removed their request for review June 10, 2022 11:17
@Totktonada Totktonada removed their assignment Jun 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants