On 28 March 2014 15:54, Zhiqian Yuan <onyourmark...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Those two fields are string type, but like other integer enumerations, > they both have a range to set value. So I decide they should be implemented > as string-valued enum type. But there's no such a thing either in C++ or in > proto. > There is no such thing as a "string-valued enum type" in the protobuf world. You can either have an enum field (that happens to have an integer encoding under the covers, but that doesn't really matter to you); or you can have a string field and do whatever validation you want externally to protobuf. Are you trying to implement an existing message format, or are you trying to define a new message format? If you have control over the format, what's wrong with a standard enum field for these fields? Oliver -- 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 protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
