Now add a field for A (which is legitimate) and it all falls apart.
Possibly a *viable* representation might be:
message C {
optional A field_a = 1;
optional B field_b = 2;
optional int32 field_c = 3;
}
and that is something that *can* be understood today, by all
implementations, and
Status: New
Owner: ken...@google.com
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 204 by paul.hounshell: Message Field Inheritance
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=204
Enhancement Request
- What steps will reproduce the problem?
message A {
optional int32 field_a = 1;
}
m
