So at various times (2008 - 2009) there are posts by people inquiring
about conversions from XML Schemas to .proto.
Even one such post provided the xslt file. Is there any chance the
Protocol Buffer project will formally support and release an XSLT that
would be updated with each release? Would
Added to the wiki.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Igor Gatis igorga...@gmail.com wrote:
Here it is:
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf-j2me/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Protocol Buffers group.
To post to this group, send email to
I'm reading messages from a socket, so I send the size of the message
and then the message. The reader reads the size, then pushes a limit
on the coded input stream, reads the message and then pops the limit.
Doing this causes me to run into the maximum number of bytes read on a
coded input
On Aug 3, 2010, at 12:46 , Jon Schewe wrote:
I know that I could create a new coded input stream for each message,
but this seems rather wasteful and slow compared with just resetting a
counter.
I complained about the same thing a little while ago:
Thanks
On Aug 3, 2010 3:10 PM, Jason Hsueh jas...@google.com wrote:
Added to the wiki.
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 7:45 PM, Igor Gatis igorga...@gmail.com wrote:
Here it is:
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf-j2me/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Sorry, we really aren't interested in maintaining anything XML-related, or
in general maintaining any code that we don't actually use. You'll have to
create your own googlecode project for this, or perhaps submit it to
protostuff as you say (I don't know what their policy is).
That said, I don't
Comment #7 on issue 210 by temporal: Java code should detect incompatible
runtime library version
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=210
The thing is, the Libtool docs very explicitly say This SO version number
should have nothing at all to do with your project version
Kenton,
I appreciate the direct response and all of your work with the project.
I'll update this post if I create something robust enough to meet most user
needs.
Thanks for the excellent tool!
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 9:36 PM, Kenton Varda ken...@google.com wrote:
Sorry, we really aren't
Comment #8 on issue 210 by aantono: Java code should detect incompatible
runtime library version
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=210
I would dare to say yes, as the protobuf-java jar doen't really have much
to do with the protoc version. Just like in C, the *.so file is
Comment #9 on issue 210 by temporal: Java code should detect incompatible
runtime library version
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=210
It is actually very important that you match protoc versions with
libprotobuf.jar versions. However, in the future we'd like to spin off
Comment #10 on issue 210 by aantono: Java code should detect incompatible
runtime library version
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=210
So how is it different from using protoc to generate the C code and have
that be bound to a particular version of *.so? Isn't the same
11 matches
Mail list logo
