What are the side-effects to define wrapper messages as a workaround ?
message Foo {
Int32 bar = 1;
}
message Int32 {
int32 value = 1;
}
In Java it allows to have Foo.hasBar() and Foo.getBar().getValue().
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Proto
Compilation from .proto to java classes that are most efficient in
serialization/decerialization to binary is super awesome,
however there are usecases that you need to push that piece of data to some
UI or some client which does not necessarily need to know what
protobuf is and how to decode yo
Compilation from .proto to java class that does most efficient binary
serialization is awesome,
however sometimes we need to pass a json representation of the piece of
that data to some UI or some other service which
may not necessarily know about protobuf or want to have dependency to some
dese
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Simon Brandhof
wrote:
> What are the side-effects to define wrapper messages as a workaround ?
>
> message Foo {
> Int32 bar = 1;
> }
>
> message Int32 {
> int32 value = 1;
> }
>
> In Java it allows to have Foo.hasBar() and Foo.getBar().getValue().
Sub-messag
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 1:16 AM, Vachagan Balayan <
vachagan.bala...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Compilation from .proto to java classes that are most efficient in
> serialization/decerialization to binary is super awesome,
> however there are usecases that you need to push that piece of data to
> some UI
