Add support for generate_package_definition

[smnbbrv]

Hi @agreatfool

thank you for your work! The tool is very much helpful.

There is a quite new feature flag generate_package_definition on the gprc-tools's protoc that is missing in your implementation.

It does not rely on grpc package anymore and that's why it breaks the generated definitions for the client.

In fact, the very first I need to do after running your plugin is changing

- import * as grpc from "grpc";
+ import * as grpc from "@grpc/grpc-js";

The next difference is the exported token that is not exported in a way it was before, but it uses the full path

var PdfGeneratorServiceService = exports['services.pdf.PdfGeneratorService'] = {
  //...

So it is not accessible anymore through the simple import

import {PdfGeneratorServiceService} from '...';

The full package path is required.

Actually, after this is implemented one can use your tool with @grpc/grpc-js as well as with grpc.

[agreatfool]

Gotcha, let me have a look.

[agreatfool]

Hi @smnbbrv ,

I just walked through the issue u mentioned. And just reproduced the exactly same error: grpc/grpc-node#931 (comment). How did you overcome this?

My os is MAC & grpc-tools v1.8.0.

[agreatfool]

Never mind. Just installed latest version of grpc-tools v1.8.1, seems it works ok.

[agreatfool]

Using new version of grpc-tools@1.8.1, and commands:

grpc_tools_node_protoc \
    --js_out=import_style=commonjs,binary:./src/proto \
    --grpc_out=generate_package_definition:./src/proto \
    --proto_path=./proto \
    proto/*.proto

Compare new generated codes with the old ones, difference of file book_grpc_pb.js:

- var grpc = require('grpc');

- var BookServiceService = exports.BookServiceService = {
+ var BookServiceService = exports['com.book.BookService'] = {

- exports.BookServiceClient = grpc.makeGenericClientConstructor(BookServiceService);

[agreatfool]

Actually I knew this lib grpc-js for a long time. And seems eventually it starts it's stable version:

README.md | Bump grpc-js to 1.0 and stop calling it "beta" | 5 days ago

@smnbbrv Can I ask the purpose why do you using this lib grpc-js instead of using grpc? Is there any usecase that this lib is required instead of grpc?

[smnbbrv]

@agreatfool well, the main thing for me was that I can build a better docker image out of it and have a better CI:

• with the @grpc/grpc-js: with webpack I build the final js bundle which is approx. 2MB. Then I add it to docker image, let's say node:alpine and it's nearly not changed in size after I put those 2MB in
• with grpc: I can't run prebuild because C client is required, I should install deps inside docker to let gyp compile / pull the C client. That heavily increases the end size of the docker image and changes CI process in a way I don't want it to be.

I don't think switching to JS client from C client will be accompanied by some performance loss; in the end of the day I use gRPC / protobuf in the browser and don't see any performance problems with v8. Less infrastructure overhead vs. features I don't ever use in gRPC => the choice is quite an easy one :D

[agreatfool]

@smnbbrv Thank you, got the idea. I will have a look at how to implement an option to switch between grpc users & grpc-js users. At least there shall have no breaking changes that would affect existing users.

[smnbbrv]

I think adding generate_package_definition as an argument to ts_out is enough and should be meanwhile compliant / logical with the grpc-tools

protoc \
--plugin=protoc-gen-ts=./node_modules/.bin/protoc-gen-ts \
--ts_out=generate_package_definition:./your_dest_dir \
-I ./proto \
./your_proto_dir/*.proto

[agreatfool]

Version 3.0.0 has been published. Doc: @grpc/grpc-js support.

[smnbbrv]

Well done! Thank you very much! Will give it a try asap

[miv]

Hello! I don't really get it how can it work as in examples?

https://github.com/agreatfool/grpc_tools_node_protoc_ts/blob/master/examples/src/grpcjs/client.ts#L11

Here, bookGrpcPb does not have index signature and does not export this symbol. There should have been cast to any at least.

[agreatfool]

@miv Hello,

Sorry. I didn't get the issue, which part do you think shall be any?

const BookServiceClient = grpc.makeClientConstructor(bookGrpcPb["com.book.BookService"], "BookService");

Js codes generated in file book_grpc_pb.js is:

var BookServiceService = exports['com.book.BookService'] = {
// ...
};

So in examples, using bookGrpcPb["com.book.BookService"] to retrieve the service definition object. And using it to make a client class const BookServiceClient = .... Seems it's very straight forward.

[miv]

No, the code is fine for JS. And everything works.

But it should not compile in TS, at least with strict checks. Type of bookGrpcPb is of exports of ts module (this one https://github.com/agreatfool/grpc_tools_node_protoc_ts/blob/master/examples/src/grpcjs/proto/book_grpc_pb.d.ts), and it does not export "com.book.BookService". So i had to do a hack kind of like:

const BookServiceClient = grpc.makeClientConstructor((bookGrpcPb as any)["com.book.BookService"], "BookService");

(notice any)

Other than that everything work fine, thank you for your work :)

[agreatfool]

I have to say: Yes, it's ugly. Since the grpc team using name like "com.book.BookService", it cannot be well handled in typescript definition file. So you have to handle it using any magic.