Python for Symbian

Hi, Is it possible, to use Protobuf for python on Python for Symbian? Do I need some compiled libraries on the executing terminal, or is it (just for using the python code, no compilation) enough to have only the python code there in place? Best regards

Re: Python for Symbian

The Python implementation currently does not require any non-Python libraries at runtime. You'll probably have to try it to see if it works on Symbian, though. :) On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Maximilian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > Hi, > > Is it possible, to use Protobuf for python on Pytho

Re: [PATCH] Fix super().__init__ call on python2.6

I don't know Python very well. Petar, can you verify this is correct? (I tried it and the tests still pass.) On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Pavel Shramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6 superclass constructor call don't need self as first > arg > but 2.6 raises error if it'

msvc71 fix

FYI, in case anyone else is stuck using VC++ 7.1, I had to apply the patch below to get protobuf 2.0.2 to compile. I'd be much obliged if the folks at google would consider applying this to the main repository, as it enables support for Visual Studio 2003 and seems otherwise harmless. (It didn't

Re: msvc71 fix

Thanks. Incidentally, I think I submitted a nearly-identical change to SVN yesterday, but forgot to mention it. :) On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 10:04 AM, Dave Wolfe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > FYI, in case anyone else is stuck using VC++ 7.1, I had to apply the > patch below to get protobuf 2.0.2

Re: [PATCH] Fix super().__init__ call on python2.6

On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 10:04:27AM -0800, Kenton Varda wrote: > I don't know Python very well. Petar, can you verify this is correct? (I > tried it and the tests still pass.) Problem is raising both in tests and in real applications. Both svn trunk and 2.0.2 version fail (will be strange if one

Re: [PATCH] Fix super().__init__ call on python2.6

Yes, I believe you. We just have a policy of reviewing all changes. :) On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Pavel Shramov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 10:04:27AM -0800, Kenton Varda wrote: > > I don't know Python very well. Petar, can you verify this is correct? > (I > > t

Protobuf's Missing Features

After playing with protobuf for the last few months, I've decided that it's not quite suitable for my purposes, due to some design decisions (which I'm sure seemed the like a good idea at the time). As much as I hate reinventing the wheel, I've decided to create my own message encoding framework

Re: Protobuf's Missing Features

code_monkey_steve escreveu: > This is my single biggest complaint, and the one reason protobuf is > unsuitable for my project: the message definitions need to include > enough information to dynamically generate the user interface for both > displaying and composing messages. I am new to this d

Re: Protobuf's Missing Features

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 5:14 PM, code_monkey_steve < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > After playing with protobuf for the last few months, I've decided that > it's not quite suitable for my purposes, due to some design decisions > (which I'm sure seemed the like a good idea at the time). As much as >