I think this would be a pretty difficult and invasive change to make,
because the basic memory model used by C++ protobuf is that each message
has sole ownership of its submessages, with no notion of shared ownership.
If we did introduce a change like this, it would also force existing users
to pay
Building with cmake on Linux should be fine. I'm not sure if we would
officially support it, but it already works and if for some reason it ever
breaks we would be happy to accept pull requests to fix it.
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:30 PM, wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I was wondering if building protobuf
I agree that since the model is that the top message owns its submessages,
the idea of shared ownership isn't necessarily useful. But something like a
weak pointer doesn't change the ownership, it would just allow objects to
be responsive to whether the submessage exists or not.
While holding
https://github.com/google/protobuf/milestone/20
ETA is end of this month.
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:26 PM Arpit Baldeva wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there a release schedule page that I can follow for upcoming release
> dates? I am interested in knowing the next release due date (tentative is
> fine).
>
If I have a root object of a deep tree of objects (I'm using Java), and I
call toBuilder() on it, so that I can manipulate it, do its "subobjects"
"become" builders as well?
That is, if I do:
Top.Builder topBuilder = top.toBuilder();
...and then later I do:
SubObject.Builder subObjectBuilder
