ok, thanks for pointing me to the right directions and your RPC
system, that should be helpful.


On Feb 27, 12:45 am, Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> wrote:
> Plugins are now mentioned in the docs in several places:
>
> http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/reference/other.htmlhttp://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/reference/cpp-genera...
> for java-generated and 
> python-generated)http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/reference/cpp/google...http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/reference/cpp/google...
>
> I agree that some sort of tutorial would be nice but my tech writer is on
> leave and as an engineer I suck at that sort of thing.  :/
>
> Here's a plugin I wrote for my own RPC system:
>
> http://code.google.com/p/capnproto/source/browse/compiler/protoc-gen-...
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 9:00 AM, phelyks <felix.schm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > i think it would also be very helpful to have some sort of "dummy-
> > example-plugin" documentation.
>
> > at the moment i am completely lost how to begin to write the plugin.
>
> > but i dont want to whine: protobufs other documentation is excellent,
> > so maybe i am just getting too comfortable ;)
>
> > On Jan 6, 7:01 pm, Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> wrote:
> > > Yes.  Sorry, I haven't had a chance to write up formal documentation yet.
> > >  See these two files:
>
> >http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/source/browse/trunk/src/google/prot....
> > ..
>
> > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Chris <hsifdr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Is the plugin framework already part of 2.3.0? I can't find any
> > > > documentation for this new feature besides some early brainstorming
> > > > posts.
>
> > > > On Dec 22 2009, 7:28 pm, Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> wrote:
> > > > > The plugin framework is not meant for this.  Plugins can only insert
> > code
> > > > at
> > > > > points that have explicitly been declared by the original generator.
> >  For
> > > > > example, in Java, the code generator generates one insertion point in
> > > > each
> > > > > class.  So, you can add new methods to a message type, but you cannot
> > > > stick
> > > > > javadoc comments on the existing methods.
>
> > > > > I think that a system which let you arbitrarily edit the generated
> > code
> > > > > would be too fragile -- any change to the code generator would
> > > > potentially
> > > > > break plugins.  In fact, I'm even worried that the current system is
> > > > risky
> > > > > because it allows plugins to get access to private members which
> > could
> > > > > change, but I don't see any way around that.
>
> > > > > All this said, I think it would be great if the protocol compiler
> > > > supported
> > > > > some format for documentation comments and automatically copied those
> > > > > comments into the generated code.  But no one has actually worked on
> > this
> > > > > yet.
>
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Christopher Piggott <
> > cpigg...@gmail.com
> > > > >wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hmm maybe I can use the "UninterpretedOption" message to do this.
> > > > > > Would something like this work?
>
> > > > > > message ChrisMessage {
> > > > > >  option javadoc = "This is an object representing Chris's Message";
> > > > > >  repeated int32 field1 = 1 [javadoc="This is a javadoc for field
> > 1];
> > > > > >  repeated int32 field2 = 2 [javadoc="This is a javadoc for field
> > 2];
> > > > > > }
>
> > > > > > Then write a plug-in that finds those and writes the ones whose
> > > > > > NamePart.equals("javadoc") in as a /** comment */
>
> > > > > > Possible?
>
> > > > > > --
>
> > > > > > 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>
> > <protobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<protobuf%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
>
> > > > <protobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<protobuf%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> > <protobuf%252bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<protobuf%25252bunsubscr...@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<protobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
> > <protobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com<protobuf%252bunsubscr...@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<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.

Reply via email to