Re: [protobuf] Compatibility Issue + Max value for the indices/field numbers + are high field number slower?

2016-06-20 Thread Jeremy Ong
> The range of valid field numbers is 1 to 2^29 - 1 Ah thanks for pointing this out; I hadn't noticed that reading the specification. I think there are many implementations of protobufs in the wild that do not in fact enforce this so there are likely bugs out there if those languages interoperate

Re: [protobuf] Compatibility Issue + Max value for the indices/field numbers + are high field number slower?

2016-06-20 Thread 'Feng Xiao' via Protocol Buffers
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 7:56 AM, a_teammate wrote: > Hey there, > > This might a stupid question, but i haven't found anything certain in the > docs/specs about that: > > Our main goal is actually to keep compatibility while syncing a tree. > > The protocol is actually just one giant oneof contai

Re: [protobuf] Compatibility Issue + Max value for the indices/field numbers + are high field number slower?

2016-06-20 Thread Jeremy Ong
https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/encoding#structure Protobuf messages are associative arrays of key value pairs, where the key is a union of the field number encoded as a varint and the value wire type (union operator being a left shift of the field number by 3 bits). Because th

[protobuf] Compatibility Issue + Max value for the indices/field numbers + are high field number slower?

2016-06-20 Thread a_teammate
Hey there, This might a stupid question, but i haven't found anything certain in the docs/specs about that: Our main goal is actually to keep compatibility while syncing a tree. The protocol is actually just one giant oneof containing all possible paths for the tree: message TreeNodeChanged {