[stringtemplate-interest] visualizer mockup

[Gerald Rosenberg]

Yes, the sockets aspect is more a proxy for discussing the fact that 
the ST instance, executing in its own process, needs to communicate 
with the tool in a language neutral manner.

I would prefer something more high level than sockets.  Google 
Protocol Buffers (BSD) and Facebook Thrift (Apache) are 
possibilities.  There are others (Etch, Avro, etc), but the practical 
choice appears to be between PB (better documentation) and Thrift 
(more bindings).

@Todd, or anyone else, do you have a recommendation?

http://stuartsierra.com/2008/07/10/thrift-vs-protocol-buffers

http://timyang.net/programming/thrift-protocol-buffers-performance-2/


At 04:47 PM 11/24/2009, Barrie Treloar wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Terence Parr <parrt at cs.usfca.edu> wrote:
> > Oh, and another architectural issue.  Should this be a socket 
> based thing like ANTLRWorks so C# and Python targets don't have to 
> build their own GUI?  I'd say yes, but then it's harder to drill 
> down into objects in the attribute table.  I'll have to YAML or 
> JSON marshall objects across the socket.  Some objects like binary 
> arrays might be hard to represent properly in language indep manner in gui too.
>
>I think some of the discussion so far raised some misunderstandings.
>
>Is this meant to be a static inspection of the template? i.e some
>meta-data about template generation - which either resides inside the
>template or perhaps in another source (file, socket stream, etc)
>
>Or is this meant to be something dynamic so that as the template is
>generated you can see what is going on?
>
>My understanding so far has been that this would be static inspection.
>And if so I am unclear what a socket implementation would provide.
>_______________________________________________
>stringtemplate-interest mailing list
>stringtemplate-interest at antlr.org
>http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/stringtemplate-interest