You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Yes, I was hoping to remove the overhead of having to prefix a length to an array of bytes that I know is of a fixed length ahead of time. Fields that effectively denote a fixed-size array of arbitrary types are very common. Some examples of such fields would be 256-bit hashes, 16-byte UUIDs, 128-bit bitstrings, etc.
Describe the solution you'd like
A way to denote a field to be a fixed-sized array of some type. The schema syntax could be as simple as [N]T where N is the fixed number of elements stored in the array, and T is the type of the elements of the array.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Using variable-length arrays, which as mentioned incurs an unnecessary size overhead for the type of data concerned.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Yes, I was hoping to remove the overhead of having to prefix a length to an array of bytes that I know is of a fixed length ahead of time. Fields that effectively denote a fixed-size array of arbitrary types are very common. Some examples of such fields would be 256-bit hashes, 16-byte UUIDs, 128-bit bitstrings, etc.
Describe the solution you'd like
A way to denote a field to be a fixed-sized array of some type. The schema syntax could be as simple as
[N]T
where N is the fixed number of elements stored in the array, and T is the type of the elements of the array.Describe alternatives you've considered
Using variable-length arrays, which as mentioned incurs an unnecessary size overhead for the type of data concerned.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: