I meant the hazzers have to go away for proto3 ;-) We have been evaluating proto2 vs proto3 and I have posted a few questions/issue about the 'has_foo()' logic, their answers gave me an impression of this is related to the default value. Btw the alpha-1 release notes <https://github.com/google/protobuf/releases/tag/v3.0.0-alpha-1> says:
1. Removal of field presence logic for primitive value fields, removal of required fields, and removal of default values. This makes proto3 significantly easier to implement with open struct representations, as in languages like Android Java, Objective C, or Go. On Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 11:57:16 AM UTC-4, V.B. wrote: > > > >> >> > and these "hazzers" logics have to go away. >> >> Google says, "we will continue to support proto2 for a long time." >> > > True, but it also means that if we ever want to use proto3 features (which > we do), then we have to trade away presence logic for primitive fields. > This is an unfortunate decision to have to make. > > -- 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/d/optout.
