Now that protocol buffers 3 has support for optional fields <https://stackoverflow.com/a/62566052/2233608> which lets you test whether the field was set or not, are FieldMasks still useful?
For instance, when implementing an Update method in gRPC which allows the client to update only the fields that they pass, should the method take a message with `optional` fields or a FieldMask? Is it a matter of personal preference? Or is there a benefit to one of them? We also want to expose the gRPC API as a JSON/HTTP API using either grpc-gateway or envoy with the grpc_json_transcoder filter. Do these have a preference with either pattern? I see that Googles AIPs <https://google.aip.dev/134> recommend FieldMasks for Update methods, but this could have been done before `optional` was available? -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/protobuf/9f8b2b48-66fe-4f97-b822-84402309a5edn%40googlegroups.com.
