On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Feng Xiao <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's either already working for Java, or only requires small tweaks for it > to work. Could you check if marking a field lazy makes any difference in > Java? If not please help file an issue on our github site. >
Thanks for your reply, Feng. Actually, I already verified that it doesn't make a difference, but before filing an issue I wanted to check if it's expected or not: currently, we generate the protobufs from a C++ program, send them over the network and parse them with Java. Marking fields "lazy" doesn't make a difference in the generated C++ code, and I was wondering if the "lazy" information was included by chance in the wire protocol or not, because if it was, I guess it would be correct to see the lazy fields not working in Java despite being marked as such in the schema (because the C++ code didn't mark them as lazy). Thanks. -- 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.
