Re: generating proto documentation
HI, I have a bad solution. What I've been doing has been generating the .cc/.h files, and then using doxygen to document those classes. You can document C++ classes from files other than the header files that define the classes. It's messy, error prone, and you end up with a lot of extra methods document that you really don't want. In summary, I'd suggest doing it another way. The detailed message documentation is lost in a sea of undocumented methods. In the past, I have started working on patching doxygen to read and parse .proto files. I didn't get as far as I would have liked. I also looked at using the compiler/parser that is part of the protobuf source code, but that strips out the comments. My other thought was to use a custom option for the comment string. Then writer a Python script that read in the descriptor proto file, and generated documentation from that. The other thought I had was to patch the C++ code generator class to generate comments in the source files in the doxygen format, but I didn't want to tie the code generator to a documentation format. I still think the best option would be to update doxygen to support reading the .proto files, but it is also the most work (maybe not in the long term). Mark On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 8:28 PM, bart van deenen bart.vandee...@gmail.comwrote: Hi all How do you document .proto files? I'd love to really define our protocol with javadoc/qtdoc/doxygen tags inside the .proto files, and generate html documentation from that. Does anyone already have a solution, or something in the works that we can improve on? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: generating proto documentation
I'm thinking of writing some scripting stuff, convert 'message' to 'struct' and stuff like that, and see how far I'll get with converting proto files into some sort of pseudo-c. I think I'll mogrify the 'optional' and 'required' and 'repeated' flags to some custom doxygen tags. As soon as I have something, I'll put it on github as an opensource project. On Mar 17, 10:49 am, Mark Assad mas...@gmail.com wrote: HI, I have a bad solution. What I've been doing has been generating the .cc/.h files, and then using doxygen to document those classes. You can document C++ classes from files other than the header files that define the classes. It's messy, error prone, and you end up with a lot of extra methods document that you really don't want. In summary, I'd suggest doing it another way. The detailed message documentation is lost in a sea of undocumented methods. In the past, I have started working on patching doxygen to read and parse .proto files. I didn't get as far as I would have liked. I also looked at using the compiler/parser that is part of the protobuf source code, but that strips out the comments. My other thought was to use a custom option for the comment string. Then writer a Python script that read in the descriptor proto file, and generated documentation from that. The other thought I had was to patch the C++ code generator class to generate comments in the source files in the doxygen format, but I didn't want to tie the code generator to a documentation format. I still think the best option would be to update doxygen to support reading the .proto files, but it is also the most work (maybe not in the long term). Mark On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 8:28 PM, bart van deenen bart.vandee...@gmail.comwrote: Hi all How do you document .proto files? I'd love to really define our protocol with javadoc/qtdoc/doxygen tags inside the .proto files, and generate html documentation from that. Does anyone already have a solution, or something in the works that we can improve on? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
invalidTag() exception
I have a C++ code that generates a buffer and sends it to a multicast address, and Java based receiver that is supposed to get the buffer and parse it. The problem I am facing is that after issuing message.parseFrom(received_buf) or message.Builder.mergeFrom (received_buf), I get the Error: com.google.protobuf.InvalidProtocolBufferException: Protocol message contained an invalid tag (zero). exception. I did verify the received buffer, it has the same length and is identical byte to byte with what the sender is sending. Also, I have the receiver side in C++, and that one has no problem whatsoever. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: invalidTag() exception
Never mind the question, I found out what the problem was. The buffer defined for the datagram packet was clearly larger than what I was expecting to get, and the parser was reading the whole buffer. Once I copy that buffer to a temporary buffer, up to the number of bytes I am receiving, and use the temporary buffer for the parser, everything works fine. On Mar 17, 12:38 pm, kolahdou...@gmail.com wrote: I have a C++ code that generates a buffer and sends it to a multicast address, and Java based receiver that is supposed to get the buffer and parse it. The problem I am facing is that after issuing message.parseFrom(received_buf) or message.Builder.mergeFrom (received_buf), I get the Error: com.google.protobuf.InvalidProtocolBufferException: Protocol message contained an invalid tag (zero). exception. I did verify the received buffer, it has the same length and is identical byte to byte with what the sender is sending. Also, I have the receiver side in C++, and that one has no problem whatsoever. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Protocol Buffers group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
