I wanted to defined custom Field- and Message options by the same name
(having the same meaning but in different scope). For example:
v--------------------------------------------------------------
import "descriptor.proto";
extend google.protobuf.FieldOptions {
optional bool aligned = 2000;
}
extend google.protobuf.MessageOptions {
optional bool aligned = 2000; // line 293
}
^--------------------------------------------------------------
This results in the following protoc error:
tst_protobuf.proto(293) : error in column=17: "aligned" is already defined
in "tst_protobuf".
However, if remove the option from the MessageOptions and try to compile a
protocol with messages like:
v--------------------------------------------------------------
message test1
{
optional int64 fld = 10 [(aligned)=true];
}
message test2
{
option (aligned) = true;
optional int64 fld = 10;
}
^--------------------------------------------------------------
Then I will get an error depending on which of the custom 'align' options I
remove:
tst_protobuf.proto(293) : error in column=10: Option field "(aligned)" is
not a field or extension of message "MessageOptions".
or
tst_protobuf.proto(298) : error in column=28: Option field "(aligned)" is
not a field or extension of message "FieldOptions".
Is this a known/design limitation? Are there pattern in place for naming
the options according to where they are used (like 'message_alignment' vs.
'field_alignment')?
Regards,
Dror Harari
p.s. the original error is reported in descriptor.cc in AddSymbol...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
