Closed vil1 closed 6 years ago
Are we going to use macros?
@LGLO I would hope we can do this without them.
@vil1 I'm not sure the right way to phrase it, but I'd hope we can make this extensible in such a way that users can define typeclasses in terms of this rather easily (similar to how derivation works.)
Same as we list multiple "backends" for a schema (codecs, generators, sql) I'd love to see us prioritize a reasonable interface for users of the library to add their own "backends" and extend the functionality that can be derived from a schema definition.
@LGLO, as @beezee I think we should (and probably can) avoid using macros, or at least keep their use to the bare minimum (translating a case class' structure into a schema).
@beezee not sure I get your point, but I do feel that we should have a separate Representation
abstraction that would allow to have the same schema define the structure of Scala ADTs, Avro's GenericContainer
and so on. In any case, this should be discussed around the (upcoming) design document.
This pull request is also intended as a mean of discussion prior the upcoming design sessions.