svn commit: samba r10721 - in branches/SAMBA_4_0/source/pidl/lib/Parse/Pidl/Samba3: .

Jeremy Allison jra at
Wed Oct 5 14:00:32 GMT 2005

On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 04:06:32PM +1000, tridge at wrote:
> Jelmer,
>  > Example output is still available at
> Wouldn't it be easier to keep the same generated code as Samba4, and
> just replace the C ndr encoding glue? Is there some reason we need to
> use a different form for the generated code?
> Ideally I'd like to see all of librpc/ ported back, but if we can't do
> that for some reason then going half way and keeping the generated
> code would at least allow future work on pidl to be shared between
> Samba3 and Samba4. 
> The problem I see with creating a new backend is that most of the
> really tricky work is in the backend specific code, especially for
> things like subcontexts and multi-level pointers. By comparison the
> ndr glue code is incredibly simple, consisting of tiny C functions
> that do things like "push a uint32". Writing those for Samba3 is
> completely trivial, whereas getting all the details right on a new
> backend is much harder, and then maintaining the two is even more
> work.

What Jelmer has seems to be working right now, and I never try
and argue with working code :-). The worst case is that we still
have to fix up some of the generated code manually, but that
still *so much* better than what we have at the moment, that
I'm still really happy with it !

This isn't something that we have to do a lot, certainly not
regenerate each time like in Samba4. The IDL doesn't change often
for the pipes that have been worked out, and it's certainly
less effort to merge back the generated code on the occasional


More information about the samba-technical mailing list