JavaScript的协议缓冲区? [英] Protocol buffers for JavaScript?
问题描述
有没有办法在JavaScript中使用协议缓冲区?
为什么要使用.js?
如果您在一段时间内考虑科学需求,在您想要向客户端发送大块数据的情况下会弹出一些情况。使用CRUD风格,您使用的并不重要。用科学的东西它确实很重要(至少我认为它确实)。
权衡:
-
protobuffs平衡了紧凑性,序列化和反序列化速度基于文本的协议(xml / json)具有更大的消息大小...但是使用javascript我想知道哪种更有效。
code.google.com/p/protobuf-plugin-closure -
http://www.vitaliykulikov.com/2011/02/gwt-friendly-protocol-buffers.html
-
< a href =http://benhakala.blogspot.com/2010/05/converting-google-protocol-buffers-to.html =nofollow noreferrer> http://benhakala.blogspot.com/2010/05 /converting-google-protocol-buffers-to.html (暗示可能使用protobufs的谷歌地图)
-
protobuffs balances compactness, serialize and deserialize speeds well.
text based protocols (xml / json) have a larger message size... but with javascript I wonder which is more effective.
code.google.com/p/protobuf-plugin-closure
Google Protocol Buffers or something similar for .net/javascript
http://www.vitaliykulikov.com/2011/02/gwt-friendly-protocol-buffers.html
http://benhakala.blogspot.com/2010/05/converting-google-protocol-buffers-to.html (alludes to google maps possibly using protobufs)
<1 i>
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf-gwt/ 我一直在寻找用于javascript的protobuf。这里有一个项目:
https://github.com/dcodeIO/ProtoBuf.js
Is there a way to do protocol buffers in JavaScript?
Why for .js?
If you think about sciencey requirements for a moment, situations pop up where you might want to send a large block of data to the client. With CRUD-style it doesn't really matter so much what you use. With sciencey stuff it does matter (at least I think it does).
tradeoffs:
reference:
Additional references provided by community (see below for more context):
I have been looking for protobuf for javascript. There is a project here: https://github.com/dcodeIO/ProtoBuf.js
这篇关于JavaScript的协议缓冲区?的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持IT屋!