On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Jon Skeet <sk...@pobox.com> wrote:

>
> On Jun 9, 1:42 am, Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> wrote:
> > In the next version there will be a third option:  LITE_RUNTIME.  This
> > variant is like optimizing for speed but will generate code that only
> > depends on a lighter version of the protobuf runtime library that does
> not
> > include descriptors or reflection.  For apps that have a small number of
> > protocol types, this can save more total code space than optimizing for
> code
> > size, since the regular runtime library is rather large.  However,
> > optimizing for both code size and lite runtime is impossible since the
> lite
> > runtime does not include reflection, which is needed for the normal code
> > size optimizations to work.  My hope is that this variant will be more
> > useful for embedded platforms and mobile devices.
>
> Is the plan that the reflection parts of the API will just throw
> exceptions, or will there be non-reflection interfaces which are
> implemented by these generated classes?


There will be a new interface called MessageLite which is a superclass of
Message.  (Just making the reflection methods throw exceptions wouldn't
really work because just their type signatures would imply dependencies on
the reflection classes.)


>
>
> Jon
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to