Skip to content

WIP: Support custom serialization for RequestContent #2843

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

heaths
Copy link
Member

@heaths heaths commented Aug 1, 2025

This doesn't work for XmlFormat, though. A generic SerializeWith<XmlFormat> implementation for some arbitrary type - container or element - can't really know if it's a document or fragment.

But, the main goal here was to reduce the boilerplate an emitter - or dev writing a convenience layer - has to write. It didn't reduce it much anyway.

I'm going to open a separate PR with just the changes to RequestContent to add the F: Format type parameter so that we have a client-defined format for both serialization and deserialization.

This doesn't work for `XmlFormat`, though. A generic `SerializeWith<XmlFormat>` implementation for some arbitrary type - container or element - can't really know if it's a document or fragment.

But, the main goal here was to reduce the boilerplate an emitter - or dev writing a convenience layer - has to write. It didn't reduce it much anyway.

I'm going to open a separate PR with just the changes to `RequestContent` to add the `F: Format` type parameter so that we have a client-defined format for both serialization and deserialization.
@github-actions github-actions bot added the Storage Storage Service (Queues, Blobs, Files) label Aug 1, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Storage Storage Service (Queues, Blobs, Files)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant