I have some file. Let's call it *Msg.proto*
I use Google's protoc.exe compiler to take my proto file and it generates a
*Msg.h* file, which contains the definition for a *Msg* class.
When I *delete* a *Msg* object it can take a really long to deallocate the
memory (when the debugger is
I'm updating my question:
I have some file. Let's call it *Msg.proto*
I use Google's Protocol Buffer protoc.exe compiler to take my proto file
and it generates a *Msg.h* file, which contains the definition for a *Msg*
class.
When I delete a *Msg* object it can take a really long to deallocate
On 8/8/2012 4:51 PM, Chris Morris wrote:
I want to keep STL debugging *for the rest of my project*. This leads me to
consider compiling the protocol buffers project without STL debugging info.
What are the implications of this?
Unless you are *very* careful, this is going to lead to
Let's pretend that file *X* is neither *Msg.h* nor any file in the Google
Protocol Buffer library. And let's say that file *Y* is either *Msg.h* or
some file in the Google Protocol Buffer library. In this case, any STL
object created in *X **cannot* be passed to *Y*, and vice versa, correct?
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Eric J. Holtman e...@holtmans.com wrote:
On 8/8/2012 4:51 PM, Chris Morris wrote:
I want to keep STL debugging *for the rest of my project*. This leads me to
consider compiling the protocol buffers project without STL debugging info.
What are the implications
So how do I ensure that the STL containers are destructed w/ the proper STL
library?
Let me second this. Microsoft themselves is very clear that if the
destructor doesn't do its cleanup on an STL container that was built
with debug features, bad things will happen.
--
You received
Issue 351: Make protobuf_lite proto files not create any static initializers
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=351
This issue is now blocking issue chromium:94925.
See http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=94925
--
You received this message because you are listed
Issue 351: Make protobuf_lite proto files not create any static initializers
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=351
This issue is now blocking issue chromium:94925.
See http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=94925
--
You received this message because you are listed
Comment #9 on issue 298 by cgruberatg...@gmail.com: protobuf jar's manifest
should include OSGi metadata
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=298
Here's a patch to the pom, adapted from Guice's info, that doesn't require
a packaging type change, and includes appropriate
Updates:
Owner: xiaof...@google.com
Comment #10 on issue 298 by liuj...@google.com: protobuf jar's manifest
should include OSGi metadata
http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=298
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are
10 matches
Mail list logo
