You're right, that's an omission from the frame syntax. I'll add the ability for all or part of the frame to be scoped as (little- endian ...) and (big-endian ...), with big-endian as the default.
Just as a side-note, though, Calx [1] is already handling little- endian data by using encode-to-buffer, where it's writing to a buffer whose endianness has been preset. This obviously isn't a general solution, but just thought I'd point it out. Zach [1] https://github.com/ztellman/calx On Nov 28, 8:50 am, zoka <ztomi...@gmail.com> wrote: > If Gloss is to decode incoming packet (byte array) in little-endian > format it is straightforward: > Wrap byte array into ByteBuffer b, invoke b.order(LITTLE_ENDIAN) and > pass b to decode function that will return Clojure map of decoded > values. > > However, when outgoing packet byte array is to be produced from map of > values, encode function will always return ByteBuffer in default big- > endian format, so resulting byte array extracted form ByteBuffer using > get() method will be incorrect. > > If Gloss is to support little-endian frames, it seems that endianness > needs to be part of frame definition. In that case Gloss decode fun > would refuse to accept ByteBuffers with wrong order() and encode fun > will always generate the correct result. > > Zoka > > On Nov 25, 3:00 am, Zach Tellman <ztell...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > ByteBuffers have an order() method which allows you to toggle the > > endianness. I haven't tested this, but since everything is built on > > top of Java's ByteBuffer functionality it should be fine as long as > > the ByteBuffers are correctly set and correctly ordered with respect > > to each other. > > > Zach > > > On Nov 23, 2:52 pm, zoka <ztomi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > JVM stores numbers in in big endian format - is there a way to process > > > binary stream containing little endian numbers? > > > > Zoka > > > > On Nov 24, 7:24 am, Zach Tellman <ztell...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Good question. The solution didn't make the cut for my initial > > > > release, but will be added soon. My plan is to have an (ordered- > > > > map ...) frame which encodes and decodes the keys in the given order. > > > > So for C interop, the frame would be > > > > > (ordered-map :a :int16, :b :float32) > > > > > An alternative would be to just turn any vector which is alternating > > > > keys and types into an ordered-map, but that seems a bit too magical. > > > > > Zach > > > > > On Nov 23, 12:12 pm, Chris Perkins <chrisperkin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 23, 12:03 pm, Zach Tellman <ztell...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > When writing Calx [1], I discovered it was a huge pain to deal with > > > > > > mixed C datatypes in Java. When writing Aleph [2], I discovered the > > > > > > problem increases by a factor of ten when dealing with streams of > > > > > > bytes. In an attempt to alleviate my own pain, and hopefully help a > > > > > > few other people out, I've written Gloss, which can transform a > > > > > > simple > > > > > > byte-format specification into an encoder and streaming decoder. > > > > > > > A full writeup can be found > > > > > > athttps://github.com/ztellman/gloss/wiki. > > > > > > > A few people have already asked me how this differs from protocol > > > > > > buffers, so I'll preemptively answer that protocol buffers are a > > > > > > fixed > > > > > > format that cannot be used to interface with external systems. > > > > > > Gloss > > > > > > is less performant than protocol buffers, but is also much less > > > > > > picky > > > > > > about formats. > > > > > > > If anyone has any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. > > > > > > Looks very useful, Zach. Thanks. > > > > > > I have a question. > > > > > > I have only taken a quick look, so maybe I'm misunderstanding the > > > > > intent, but it's not clear to me how you would use this for sending > > > > > and receiving structured data from, say, a C program. > > > > > > Taking your example from the wiki: > > > > > > (def fr (compile-frame {:a :int16, :b :float32})) > > > > > > Let's say I want to talk to a C program that speaks in structs, like > > > > > this: > > > > > > struct Foo { short a; float b; } > > > > > > The problem is, the C program cares about order - the short comes > > > > > before the float. How does the Clojure program know what order I need > > > > > the fields in, since I have specified the format with a map; an > > > > > unordered data structure? Is there another way to specify a structure > > > > > where order of the fields matters? If so, why have two ways of doing > > > > > it? Or am I just missing something? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > - Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
