Jason: You know that's what I thought too about the InputStream/OutputStream after reading the Javadoc. I'm using Eclipse Galileo with Java 1.6.0.17 -for some reason it let me compile it and run it, creating an instance -I figured that was probably one of the problems.
I'll post some code later. On Dec 2, 10:46 pm, Jason Hsueh <jas...@google.com> wrote: > > Well, InputStream and OutputStream are abstract classes. I'm not sure how > you instantiated them in your tests to determine that they do not work > (unless the problem you got was that you could not create an abstract > OutputStream object, which has nothing to do with protobuf code). You need > to provide a concrete implementation of OutputStream. writeTo() only cares > about writing raw bytes to the OutputStream, so the additional methods like > writeInt() and writeObject() provided by DataOutputStream and > ObjectOutputStream, respectively, do not matter. The only thing that would > matter is if the bytes that were passed to the write() method were not the > actual bytes written. As Kenton pointed out this is the case for, say, a > gzipped output stream. You would obviously need to have your reader be aware > that it is reading gzipped data, rather than raw bytes. Otherwise, it > doesn't matter what output stream implementation you choose, so long as it > writes the bytes that are passed to the write() method. > > If message.writeTo(socket.getOutputStream()); does not work for you, please > post a small reproducible example. > > > > > I keep coming around to the fact that it looks like a specific data > > stream type in Java does do something to the byte stream (perhaps > > adding extra bytes for a header or some sort of meta information like > > you mentioned? And in Java you might need the same input stream to > > read it properly? I dunno -but again from my original post, I want to > > make sure if I do get that series of bytes over to a C++ app, it's in > > a form that can be handled.). > > Anyway, I'm going to experiment further to see what I get. If I get a > > simple example working, I'll post it as I'm sure I can't be the first > > person with this dilemma. > > > On Dec 2, 6:31 pm, Henner Zeller <henner.zel...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > transparent as in: the same data is written out that you put in. If > > > you see a difference then this might be because the ObjectOutputStream > > > might add something to the data you provide, such as writing > > > delimiters or something. So I guess the simple write(byte[]) will not > > > actually write the content of the arrays but as well the length or > > > something (this is a wild guess - haven't looked at the sources, but > > > it would explain what you see). > > > > Why do you use the ObjectOutputStream anyway instead of the simpler > > > OutputStream ? > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Protocol Buffers" group. > > To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<protobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@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.
