Skip to content
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

factor out codec into a separate crate #324

Open
koehlma opened this issue Jan 30, 2025 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #325
Open

factor out codec into a separate crate #324

koehlma opened this issue Jan 30, 2025 · 4 comments · May be fixed by #325

Comments

@koehlma
Copy link

koehlma commented Jan 30, 2025

I would like to use the abstractions provided for the various compression algorithms in the codec module in a synchronous context. Would you be open to factoring out the codec module into a separate crate? I would be glad to work on a corresponding PR.

@NobodyXu
Copy link
Collaborator

I personally think that's a reasonable and willing to accept such PR, cc @robjtede @Nemo157 what's your thoughts on this?

@Nemo157
Copy link
Member

Nemo157 commented Jan 31, 2025

That's something I'd thought of doing for a while but never got round to. I was also thinking it'd be good to extract the generic state machine IO impls into a separate crate too, that way it would be possible to implement codec for an unsupported compression algorithm and wrap it in a reader/writer.

@koehlma koehlma linked a pull request Jan 31, 2025 that will close this issue
@koehlma
Copy link
Author

koehlma commented Jan 31, 2025

I opened a PR also factoring out the core IO traits as suggested by @Nemo157.

For some reason, the Gzip test with level 0 is failing. However, this also seems to happen with the latest upstream version (on my machine). Any ideas?

@NobodyXu
Copy link
Collaborator

For some reason, the Gzip test with level 0 is failing. However, this also seems to happen with the latest upstream version (on my machine). Any ideas?

Just slim through the PR, not sure about that

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants