I keep clicking on "reply" instead of "reply all"...

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jesper Eskilson <jes...@eskilson.se>
Date: Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: Parsing messages in C++ with extensions
To: Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com>


On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Kenton Varda<ken...@google.com> wrote:
> Some linkers will drop object files that aren't referenced from anywhere, so
> if your code doesn't actually use anything from the .proto file defining the
> extension, it might not be linked in, and thus won't be in the registry.
>  This is one of the common problems that make me wish we had an explicit
> ExtensionRegistry in C++...
> Otherwise, I don't know what your problem might be.  If you can narrow it
> down to a small self-contained example I could debug it.

Well, hm. I don't seem to be linking with the defining code. That
would probably explain it.

Would an explicit extension-registry be difficult to implement?

What's the recommended way of solving the problem? Linking in all the
protocol definitions in the same module is something I'd like to
avoid. Is there a way I can extract the "unknown" field and pass it to
the "defining module" for further parsing?

--
/Jesper



-- 
/Jesper

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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