Just curious is the Python C/C++ implementation is on its way?
Kenton Varda
Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:34:35 -0700
The plan is to modify the current Python implementation so that
message
objects can wrap C++ protobuf objects via the reflection interface.
This
means a few things:
* The Python API will
I am having trouble accessing many members of my .proto file. It
seems that compound members are not accessible with set_() method
calls. I saw in your example code the use of mutable_() calls. What
does this apply to and is there documentation on it? could this be the
solution to my problem?
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 08:13, jayt0...@gmail.com jayt0...@gmail.com wrote:
I am having trouble accessing many members of my .proto file. It
seems that compound members are not accessible with set_() method
calls. I saw in your example code the use of mutable_() calls. What
does this
Bar bar_message;
bar_message.mutable_bar()-CopyFrom(foo_message);
.. and that should of course be a
bar_message.mutable_foo()-CopyFrom(foo_message);
-h
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Protocol
wow. I will try that. Yes, I am trying to set a complete 'foo'
message.
Is there documentation anywhere on this? I am coming up empty with web
searches...
On Sep 23, 8:25 am, Henner Zeller h.zel...@acm.org wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 08:13, jayt0...@gmail.com jayt0...@gmail.com
message foo1 {
optional int32 value1 = 1;
optional int32 value2 = 2;
}
message foo2 {
optional foo1 stuff1 = 1;
optional foo2 stuff2 = 2;
}
foo1 msg_foo1;
foo2 msg_foo2;
msg_foo2.set_stuff1(foo1);
This is the concept of what I'm trying to do.
On Sep 23, 8:25 am, Henner Zeller
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 08:37, jayt0...@gmail.com jayt0...@gmail.com wrote:
wow. I will try that. Yes, I am trying to set a complete 'foo'
message.
Is there documentation anywhere on this? I am coming up empty with web
searches...
The api-documentation has it
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 08:45, jayt0...@gmail.com jayt0...@gmail.com wrote:
message foo1 {
optional int32 value1 = 1;
optional int32 value2 = 2;
}
message foo2 {
optional foo1 stuff1 = 1;
optional foo2 stuff2 = 2;
}
foo1 msg_foo1;
foo2 msg_foo2;
msg_foo2.set_stuff1(foo1);
so this has to be done whenever there is a compound type? I.e. types
used for messages that are defined in other messages?
If not, what is the rule for when a mutable pointer has to be
obtained?
I am also noticing that I am having what appears to be this same
problem when using 'string' type
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 08:54, jayt0...@gmail.com jayt0...@gmail.com wrote:
so this has to be done whenever there is a compound type? I.e. types
used for messages that are defined in other messages?
If not, what is the rule for when a mutable pointer has to be
obtained?
I am also noticing
so this has to be done whenever there is a compound type? I.e. types
used for messages that are defined in other messages?
If not, what is the rule for when a mutable pointer has to be
obtained?
I am also noticing that I am having what appears to be this same
problem when using 'string' type
so this has to be done whenever there is a compound type? I.e. types
used for messages that are defined in other messages?
If not, what is the rule for when a mutable pointer has to be
obtained?
I am also noticing that I am having what appears to be this same
problem when using 'string' type
what about if you have something like
message foo1 {
optional int32 value1 = 1;
optional int32 value2 = 2;
}
message foo2 {
repeated foo1 stuff1 = 1;
optional foo1 stuff2 = 2;
}
do you know how to add another stuff1 to foo2 structure?
On Sep 23, 8:45 am,
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 09:53, jayt0...@gmail.com jayt0...@gmail.com wrote:
what about if you have something like
message foo1 {
optional int32 value1 = 1;
optional int32 value2 = 2;
}
message foo2 {
repeated foo1 stuff1 = 1;
optional foo1 stuff2 = 2;
}
do you know
The different accessor functions for C++ protobuf classes are documented in
detail here:
http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/reference/cpp-generated.html
Message objects can be large, so you should avoid copying them if possible.
Instead, you should use the mutable_() accessor to
Hard to say. Lots of people have said they'd like to work on it, but
somehow it never gets done. Would you like to work on it?
That said, I have written a patch which significantly improves Python
Protobuf performance (by an order of magnitude or more) without using C
extensions, which will be
Kenton Varda wrote:
Thanks for doing this. Unfortunately, I guess this requires forking the
code? There is a lot of work that needs to be done on the Python
version and having to do them all twice will be pretty annoying. In
fact there is a rather large change coming which improves
17 matches
Mail list logo
