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.
To interact with the publisher API we are using the publisher models and the Furly.Extensions library so we don't have to maintain the models ourselves (mostly because Furly supports Variant)
In the future we'd like to be able to trim our clients to reduce memory consumption and application sizes, this is mostly blocked by our use of Furly.Extensions and the Variant type not being trim friendly.
Describe the solution you'd like
Json serialization / deserialization of publisher models should be trimmable. This would allow both end users and possibly the opc-publisher itself to compile .NET application with (partial) trimming reducing memory footprint and therefore hardware requirements / cost.
Describe alternatives you've considered
n.a.
Additional context
n.a.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
New title is much better since Publisher has the whole OPCFouncation ComplexTypes dynamic type/assembly generation and will probably only be partially trimmable for a long time anyway.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
To interact with the publisher API we are using the publisher models and the Furly.Extensions library so we don't have to maintain the models ourselves (mostly because Furly supports Variant)
In the future we'd like to be able to trim our clients to reduce memory consumption and application sizes, this is mostly blocked by our use of Furly.Extensions and the Variant type not being trim friendly.
Describe the solution you'd like
Json serialization / deserialization of publisher models should be trimmable. This would allow both end users and possibly the opc-publisher itself to compile .NET application with (partial) trimming reducing memory footprint and therefore hardware requirements / cost.
Describe alternatives you've considered
n.a.
Additional context
n.a.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: