On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 10:57:52 -0700, Kenton Varda wrote:

> So Java users don't like relying on C++ code in their build process.  On

It's not so much C++ as the reliance on external stuff with
platform-dependent paths. Hence my idea of embedding the compiler.

> parser in both languages as well.  A correct parser that supports all
> features (e.g. custom options) is a large, complicated piece of code, and
> maintaining two separate implementations of it would be a huge pain. This

I don't think anybody would expect you to maintain a second parser/protoc
codebase - that would really be pointless.

Unfortunately I cannot offer any easy solution either. Even turning protoc
into a shared library (with Java API via plain JNI (ugh) or - probably
faster and more stable - JNA) would only seemingly fix that particular
problem at the expense of more build complexity. Certainly technically
doable though.

For now embedding the existing prebuilt protoc executables into any Java
plugins and hiding the raw command execution is probably be the best
(cheapest) way.

-h



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