Hmm. Good question. I had certainly intended for these classes to be
"expanded" using partial classes (as I've done for some of the well-known
types, for example).
It's possible that we should just remove the attribute from the class
declaration, possibly adding either this attribute or others to individual
properties etc. Do you have any particular views on which attributes you
*would* like to be applied where?
Jon
On Friday, 23 October 2015 21:53:32 UTC+1, Rob Cecil wrote:
>
> I noticed that the typical protobuf class looks like::
>
> public sealed partial class OpenViewRequest : pb::IMessage<OpenViewRequest
> > {
>
>
>
> Which rules out derived classes, but not partials. However, the whole
> class is decorated with DebuggerNonUserCode, which interferes with
> debugging my partial definition.
>
> Should I avoid this?
>
> I'm just defining additional ctors that take data classes.
>
> 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 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.
