WIP: Support custom serialization for RequestContent #2843
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This doesn't work for `XmlFormat`, though. A generic `SerializeWith<XmlFormat>` implementation for some arbitrary type - container or element - can't really know if it's a document or fragment. But, the main goal here was to reduce the boilerplate an emitter - or dev writing a convenience layer - has to write. It didn't reduce it much anyway. I'm going to open a separate PR with just the changes to `RequestContent` to add the `F: Format` type parameter so that we have a client-defined format for both serialization and deserialization.
|
No longer necessary. We've incorporated similar changes into main already, and can't do this for XML because we need tag names and can't do so generically. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This doesn't work for
XmlFormat, though. A genericSerializeWith<XmlFormat>implementation for some arbitrary type - container or element - can't really know if it's a document or fragment.But, the main goal here was to reduce the boilerplate an emitter - or dev writing a convenience layer - has to write. It didn't reduce it much anyway.
I'm going to open a separate PR with just the changes to
RequestContentto add theF: Formattype parameter so that we have a client-defined format for both serialization and deserialization.