You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm new to Node, so please forgive me if I'm missing something obvious here. I'm building a utility to parse binary files based on a Json definition of the file specification, and while I originally implemented it in Java, that solution is clunky and already showing strain so I'm rebuilding in Node.
My Json elements have types that already match your primitives, but I notice the Parser.primitiveN() function is private. It seems a little silly to re-implement mappings that I can see are happening in reverse once I call parse(), but I could do that if needed. I'm also happy to make the changes to expose PrimitiveTypes and primitiveN(), but looking at the git history it seems like they might've been made private for a reason. If someone could shed some light on why and provide guidance on the best path forward it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sorry for not getting back to you sooner. IIRC primitiveN is private simply because there were no use cases to generate the parser definition itself dynamically. Also we wanted to minimize the API surface.
I'm new to Node, so please forgive me if I'm missing something obvious here. I'm building a utility to parse binary files based on a Json definition of the file specification, and while I originally implemented it in Java, that solution is clunky and already showing strain so I'm rebuilding in Node.
My Json elements have types that already match your primitives, but I notice the
Parser.primitiveN()
function is private. It seems a little silly to re-implement mappings that I can see are happening in reverse once I callparse()
, but I could do that if needed. I'm also happy to make the changes to exposePrimitiveTypes
andprimitiveN()
, but looking at the git history it seems like they might've been made private for a reason. If someone could shed some light on why and provide guidance on the best path forward it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: