Details
-
Improvement
-
Status: Closed
-
Major
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
None
-
None
-
None
Description
Folks have pointed out that it's not always best for users to interact with the ByteBuffers that are now backing binary fields in our structs. In truth, it seems like ByteBuffers are probably an expert means of access, with associated benefits and complexities.
I think we should generate two different sets of accessors for binary fields: a default set, named like usual, that return and take byte[], and a second set, named something like "get_buffer_for_<field>" that returns the underlying ByteBuffer. The byte[] accessors can wrap around the ByteBuffer ones as necessary.