Now add a field for A (which is legitimate) and it all falls apart.
Possibly a *viable* representation might be:
message C {
optional A field_a = 1;
optional B field_b = 2;
optional int32 field_c = 3;
}
and that is something that *can* be understood today, by all
implementations, and involves no copy/paste error, while retaining the
ability to add fields to all the message types.
Just a thought...
Marc
On 12 July 2010 23:10, <[email protected]> wrote:
> message A {
> optional int32 field_a = 1;
> }
>
> message B {
> optional int32 field_b = 2;
> }
>
> message C {
> optional int32 field_a = 1;
> optional int32 field_b = 2;
> optional int32 field_c = 3;
> }
>
--
Regards,
Marc
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
