I get a couple of related warnings when compiling MessageLite.java.
Example:
protected boolean parseUnknownField( ... )
{
final FieldSet extensions =
internalGetResult().extensions;
...
}
The warnings are because .extensions is a private field of
ExtendableMessage>. The
I should have been more specific about what compiler I'm using: open-
jdk-6 version 6b14-1.4.1, on a linux (ubuntu) development environment
from within netbeans.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Proto
I have been having a lot of problems getting things to compile - the
java protobuf library, to begin with; and even after getting that to
compile, I couldn't get MyProtos.java (generated code) to compile.
Come to find out, if I switch to sun-jdk-6 everything builds.
Is this a known issue, or is
This whole topic - how to save multiple messages to a single stream -
comes up frequently enough that I'm starting to think there should be
a more flexible answer than what's in the FAQ. Declaring a one-byte
"End of Object" seems like it would be one way to handle it. Whatever
it is, it should k
Is it possible, with the plugin framework, to add certain annotations
or even comments (like javadocs) to the .proto file that make it all
the way through to the generated java code?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to
Hmm maybe I can use the "UninterpretedOption" message to do this.
Would something like this work?
message ChrisMessage {
option javadoc = "This is an object representing Chris's Message";
repeated int32 field1 = 1 [javadoc="This is a javadoc for field 1];
repeated int32 field2 = 2 [javadoc="
n't see any way around that.
>
> All this said, I think it would be great if the protocol compiler supported
> some format for documentation comments and automatically copied those
> comments into the generated code. But no one has actually worked on this
> yet.
>
> On Tue,
On Dec 22, 4:53 pm, Henner Zeller
wrote:
> /*
> * some block comment
> */
> int32 some_field = 1;
> int32 some_other_field = 2; // short comment.
I would be fine with that, but I also woudn't have a problem with you
requiring everything be a block, because you can still do it on on
> > But more difficult is comments like this:
> > // Blah blah blah here is a list:
> > // * blah blah blah
> > // * blah blah blah blah
> > // * blah blah
Hmm. Javadoc would let you encode lists as ... ... which would be nice, though I suppose not critical. Seems that
you could just
> > > Is this a constraint we want to have or need
> > I think so. I think it's helpful to say "This comment is special."
> I disagree.
OK, I concede. I tried to think of a good reason why I would have a
comment in the .proto but NOT want to have it in the generated code -
and I couldn't really
10 matches
Mail list logo
