Have you tried just using the FieldDescriptor? I suspect that will work, as
it's what some of our own code does. For example see:
https://github.com/google/protobuf/blob/master/python/google/protobuf/text_format.py#L819
On Monday, April 24, 2017 at 8:19:23 PM UTC-7, Robert Dyer wrote:
>
> I'm
If the bitstring has a maximum length that is smaller than 32 or 64 bits,
you could declare it as an integer type.
Otherwise you might want to declare it as a "bytes" type.
On Tuesday, April 18, 2017 at 1:34:01 AM UTC-7, oberon.me...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
> Hello everyone
> I am new to protobuf
Hi,
I am trying to build and run a project using protobuf-lite, my library (
libMaster.so) links to another library (libpulsar.so).
*Scenario 1 -* both libraries use protobuf classes.
libpulsar.so includes static library libprotobuf-lite.a but is built
with -fvisibility=hidden
I don't think we support building with -fvisibility=hidden.
That said, it might be a simple fix. You could try tweaking the code in
base/port.h according to the suggestions here:
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Visibility
If you got it to work I think we would welcome a PR on GitHub.
On Friday,
I agree with Josh. It is very unlikely that we would introduce new keywords
for defining a different kind of service.
On Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 12:45:29 PM UTC-7, Josh Humphries wrote:
>
> I think the right approach to something like this would be to use the
> existing service definition
Those functions are marked "inline", so the compiler should not be emitting
references to them. Do you have any unusual inlining settings on your
compiler/project?
On Friday, April 28, 2017 at 3:39:59 AM UTC-7,
dbbrealtimesoftw...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I am starting to use the protobuf
There is no way to do that. A message does not know what message it is
contained inside. Pointers only go down to submessages, not up to parent
messages.
On Friday, April 28, 2017 at 3:49:41 AM UTC-7, Peter Wang wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> 1. message Foo's definition,
> message Foo {
> extensions
If you have a change that makes protobuf code not rely on undefined
behavior, and also doesn't sacrifice performance, then we should merge it.
Feel free to send a GitHub PR. But make sure the code is C++03 (protobuf
doesn't use C++11 yet).
On Tuesday, April 25, 2017 at 1:36:31 PM UTC-7,
Hi,
I am starting to use the protobuf library and have downloaded protobuff
v3.2.0 for windows.
I have made up my <>.proto file and generated the <>.ph.h and <>.pb.cc
files, build the protobuf libraries, created dll files for VC2015, produces
the proc.exe file and included everything in a
Hello,
1. message Foo's definition,
message Foo {
extensions 100 to 199;
}
2. extension message Baz's definition,
message Baz {
extend Foo {
optional Baz foo_ext = 124;
}
}
3. get the baz object's pointer by foo object use the MutableExtension()
API,
Foo foo;
Baz* baz =
Hello,
1. message Foo's definition,
message Foo {
extensions 100 to 199;
}
2. extension message Baz's definition,
message Baz {
extend Foo {
optional Baz foo_ext = 124;
}
}
3. get the baz object's pointer by foo object use the MutableExtension()
API,
Foo foo;
Baz* baz =
Hello,
I am trying to compile protobuf with very simple arguments and it does not
work.
CFLAGS="-fPIC -DPIC -fvisibility=hidden" CXXFLAGS="-fPIC -DPIC
-fvisibility=hidden" ./configure --prefix=/USERS/test/protobuf-2.5.0/output
--enable-shared --enable-static --with-pic (then make install)
12 matches
Mail list logo
