Technology
Why gRPC
Typed contracts at the wire: one schema for Rust and TypeScript callers.
Why gRPC
Land uses Protocol Buffers and gRPC because the editor is split across cooperating elements. Mountain, Cocoon, Air, Grove, and other services need shared message contracts that can be generated into Rust and TypeScript.
The important claim is not a latency slogan. The important claim is that a route starts from a .proto contract, generated code, and a named service boundary.
Protocol Buffer Schema
Every Vine message is defined in a .proto file. The schema specifies field names, types, and service methods. Generated Rust and TypeScript code keeps both sides aligned when implemented routes change.
Generated Stubs
Rust uses tonic and prost. TypeScript uses generated stubs for the Cocoon and frontend side. This avoids hand-written JSON contracts for critical IPC paths.
Streaming And Cancellation
gRPC gives Land unary requests, notifications, cancellation, and streaming routes under one schema model. The current source includes bidirectional Mountain and Cocoon channels, plus Air and Grove protocol definitions.
Where gRPC Appears
Vine owns the protocol layer. Mountain exposes and consumes gRPC services. Cocoon runs a gRPC server and client for extension-host work. Air and Grove also define service contracts. Not every internal call goes through gRPC, so public copy should name the route instead of saying all communication uses one channel.