They have different wire type (2; 3 and 4). They are stored in different ways and because of that they have a little bit different code inside parsing/serializing methods.
2010/4/29 Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> > Why do you need to generate different code for the two? All the official > code generators generate exactly the same code for message classes whether > they be nested messages or groups. Version 1 of protocol buffers generated > different classes and it proved to be an enormous pain. > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Adam Kwintkiewicz < > adam.kwintkiew...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> hmm this is a slight problem. I am iterating over the nested messages and >> then generating a message/group code. I don't have reference to the specific >> field >> >> 2010/4/29 Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> >> >> A single message type can be used as both a message and as a group, so >>> there is no way to tell which it is from the Descriptor. You have to have >>> the FieldDescriptor in the containing message. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 1:36 PM, adamdms <adam.kwintkiew...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> how to check whether the current message (Descriptor *) is a group? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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.
