On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 2:07 PM, Bo Yang <[email protected]> wrote: > @thomas, for question 2, do you remember any reason? It seems to me only > direct dependencies of generated files are useful. Is current way > over-protective? >
My guess would be because we don't know exactly what all the generators capture in the generated source. If one captured something about a transitive type (say for an extension registry, enum value, etc.), then might need to regenerate because of that change. Same reason C/C++ compilers capture the transitive dep, it gets to hard to tell if it changes this output or not. TVL > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 11:02 AM Thomas Van Lenten <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> The intent was to make it easier to hook things into build systems, i.e. >> - you could get something like C/C++ compilers can do to generate a .d file >> you can -include to force sources to regenerate when a input proto >> changes. I think the only reason it was single file was simplicity (and >> from a build system pov, you usually only want to reissue the command for >> the things that changed, so one at a time). >> >> TVL >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 1:58 PM, Bo Yang <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 1. This is the original PR to implement the feature: >>> https://github.com/google/protobuf/commit/532c94145b66053615 >>> 13682601f1d8e9f97a2497 >>> I don't think there is technical issue to block supporting multiple >>> input files. However, we don't have plan to implement that yet. You are >>> welcome to contribute. >>> 2. I remember we just want to be protective when we implement this >>> feature. +Thomas Van Lenten <[email protected]> Do you remember any >>> specific reason we need full closure dependency of generated files? >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 3:25 PM Arpit Baldeva <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I tried using --dependency_out option and ran into a few issues. >>>> >>>> 1. It does not work with multiple files input. Are there any plans >>>> to add that support? >>>> 2. I noticed that the dependency file includes the whole dependency >>>> chain from other proto files. I am not sure if it is necessary. So if >>>> there >>>> is foo.proto that includes bar.proto and someone makes a change in >>>> bar.proto, I don't think generating code for foo.proto is a necessity. >>>> Is >>>> there something I am missing here? >>>> 3. The option actually did not work for me. But I did not dig into >>>> it too much because I wanted to figure out 1&2 first. >>>> >>>> >>>> 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 https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >> -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
