I'm in the middle of converting a project that provides some ostream operators (for logging purposes) for a number of thrift structures. The project was using 0.8.0 and in 0.9.3 some ostream operator overloads were added with
THRIFT-3336. The solution that was provided here runs into complications if a thrift structure is contained within another one. Take this simple example:
I'm considering adding an annotation to the thrift IDL that the compiler will recognize that allows someone to say, "I am going to provide my own operator<< for this structure, don't generate one". This would replace the printTo mechanism that was added in
Here is an example:
The annotation cpp.customostream (or the compiler option --gen cpp:no_ostream_operators for global effect) tells the compiler to emit only the declaration of the operator << but does not emit a definition (implementation). It would be up to the implementation building against the generated code to provide an operator << if such an operator is needed for conversion to a stream (cout, lexical_cast to string, etc..).