Re: [protobuf] message wrapped enums
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Mohamed Koubaa
wrote:
> Hi Feng,
>
> I didn't think about the use case of passing empty messages. No, I have
> not measured the binary size impact. Actually I was more annoyed by my IDE
> suggesting all of the inherited message methods when I really only wanted
> to see the enum values.
>
> If a binary size impact is measurable and poses a problem for us we could
> suggest some workarounds - but I don't see this in the near future.
>
> A possibility is annotating the messages in the proto file as 'enum
> wrappers' for protoc to deal with them differently. Alternatively, enum
> messages could be annotated with a namespace.
>
Protoc support a plugin framework where you can write your own
code-generator. It should be fairly easy to write a plugin to generate only
the enums in a namespace in your case. More info here:
https://github.com/google/protobuf/blob/master/src/google/protobuf/compiler/plugin.h#L35
Some teams inside Google are already using such a plugin to generate code
for their too-large proto enums (an enum with thousands of values).
>
> Thanks,
> Mohamed Koubaa
> Software Developer
> Ansys Inc
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Feng Xiao wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Mohamed Koubaa > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> In my cpp proto3 project I am using enums that are wrapped in messages
>>> to avoid namespace collisions. See for example:
>>>
>>> message Physics {
>>> enum Enum {
>>> STRUCTURAL = 0;
>>> THERMAL = 1;
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> In c++ I can refer to it by Physics::STRUCTURAL which is great.
>>>
>>> In this case, the Physics message does not have any fields. It derives
>>> from google::protobuf::Message or MessageLite and has some generated
>>> methods that are not relevant. In a project with several thousand enums,
>>> this could create binary bloat when compiled.
>>>
>> Have you measured the binary size impact of these generated classes?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Does it make sense for protoc to identify messages that are simply there
>>> to wrap enums and provide a lighter api for it?
>>>
>> Even for an empty message, protoc has to generate the
>> parsing/serialization methods because passing empty messages in RPC is a
>> valid use case and the empty message may be extended to be not empty later.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Or more generally to identify messages that do not have fields and
>>> derive from something even smaller than MessageLite?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mohamed Koubaa
>>> Software Developer
>>> Ansys Inc
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "Protocol Buffers" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>> an email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com.
>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [protobuf] message wrapped enums
Hi Feng,
I didn't think about the use case of passing empty messages. No, I have
not measured the binary size impact. Actually I was more annoyed by my IDE
suggesting all of the inherited message methods when I really only wanted
to see the enum values.
If a binary size impact is measurable and poses a problem for us we could
suggest some workarounds - but I don't see this in the near future.
A possibility is annotating the messages in the proto file as 'enum
wrappers' for protoc to deal with them differently. Alternatively, enum
messages could be annotated with a namespace.
Thanks,
Mohamed Koubaa
Software Developer
Ansys Inc
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Feng Xiao wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Mohamed Koubaa
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> In my cpp proto3 project I am using enums that are wrapped in messages to
>> avoid namespace collisions. See for example:
>>
>> message Physics {
>> enum Enum {
>> STRUCTURAL = 0;
>> THERMAL = 1;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> In c++ I can refer to it by Physics::STRUCTURAL which is great.
>>
>> In this case, the Physics message does not have any fields. It derives
>> from google::protobuf::Message or MessageLite and has some generated
>> methods that are not relevant. In a project with several thousand enums,
>> this could create binary bloat when compiled.
>>
> Have you measured the binary size impact of these generated classes?
>
>
>>
>> Does it make sense for protoc to identify messages that are simply there
>> to wrap enums and provide a lighter api for it?
>>
> Even for an empty message, protoc has to generate the
> parsing/serialization methods because passing empty messages in RPC is a
> valid use case and the empty message may be extended to be not empty later.
>
>
>
>> Or more generally to identify messages that do not have fields and derive
>> from something even smaller than MessageLite?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mohamed Koubaa
>> Software Developer
>> Ansys Inc
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Protocol Buffers" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [protobuf] message wrapped enums
On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 7:38 AM, Mohamed Koubaa
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In my cpp proto3 project I am using enums that are wrapped in messages to
> avoid namespace collisions. See for example:
>
> message Physics {
> enum Enum {
> STRUCTURAL = 0;
> THERMAL = 1;
> }
> }
>
> In c++ I can refer to it by Physics::STRUCTURAL which is great.
>
> In this case, the Physics message does not have any fields. It derives
> from google::protobuf::Message or MessageLite and has some generated
> methods that are not relevant. In a project with several thousand enums,
> this could create binary bloat when compiled.
>
Have you measured the binary size impact of these generated classes?
>
> Does it make sense for protoc to identify messages that are simply there
> to wrap enums and provide a lighter api for it?
>
Even for an empty message, protoc has to generate the parsing/serialization
methods because passing empty messages in RPC is a valid use case and the
empty message may be extended to be not empty later.
> Or more generally to identify messages that do not have fields and derive
> from something even smaller than MessageLite?
>
> Thanks,
> Mohamed Koubaa
> Software Developer
> Ansys Inc
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Protocol Buffers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[protobuf] message wrapped enums
Hello,
In my cpp proto3 project I am using enums that are wrapped in messages to
avoid namespace collisions. See for example:
message Physics {
enum Enum {
STRUCTURAL = 0;
THERMAL = 1;
}
}
In c++ I can refer to it by Physics::STRUCTURAL which is great.
In this case, the Physics message does not have any fields. It derives from
google::protobuf::Message or MessageLite and has some generated methods
that are not relevant. In a project with several thousand enums, this
could create binary bloat when compiled.
Does it make sense for protoc to identify messages that are simply there to
wrap enums and provide a lighter api for it? Or more generally to identify
messages that do not have fields and derive from something even smaller
than MessageLite?
Thanks,
Mohamed Koubaa
Software Developer
Ansys Inc
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
