[jira] Updated: (THRIFT-627) should c++ have setters for optional fields?

["Jake Farrell (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-627?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Jake Farrell updated THRIFT-627:
--------------------------------

    Attachment: thrift-627_trunk.patch
                thrift-627_0.5.x.patch

Adds setters for all fields to the generated cpp code which will automatically set the __isset.field to true for optional values.

> should c++ have setters for optional fields?
> --------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: THRIFT-627
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-627
>             Project: Thrift
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: C++ - Compiler
>         Environment: c++
>            Reporter: Ben Taitelbaum
>         Attachments: thrift-627_0.5.x.patch, thrift-627_trunk.patch
>
>
> It seems non-intuitive to me to have to set __isset.someField = true after setting an optional field someField on a struct. Would it make sense to have a set_someField method that would both set the field and modify __isset?
> One of the cases for this is for when a field goes from being required to being optional, and it's easy to forget to set __isset in the code.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.