Will "unittest_custom_options.proto" by updated in 2.0.3 to test EnumValueOptions, or will there be a new proto file?
I have used your hint about them being like field options to implement the following passing unit test for my Haskell version: > pamac-cek10:protobuf chrisk$ diff -u unittest_custom_options.proto > unittest_custom_options_cek.proto > --- unittest_custom_options.proto 2008-10-06 09:34:07.000000000 +0100 > +++ unittest_custom_options_cek.proto 2008-12-01 18:18:34.000000000 > +0000 > @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ > // > // A proto file used to test the "custom options" feature of proto2. > > +// XXX CEK : changed to add enum value options as a test > > // A custom file option (defined below). > option (file_opt1) = 9876543210; > @@ -81,6 +82,10 @@ > optional MethodOpt1 method_opt1 = 7890860; > } > > +extend google.protobuf.EnumValueOptions { > + repeated int32 enumval_opt1 = 818181; > +} > + > // A test message with custom options at all possible locations (and > also some > // regular options, to make sure they interact nicely). > message TestMessageWithCustomOptions { > @@ -94,7 +99,7 @@ > enum AnEnum { > option (enum_opt1) = -789; > > - ANENUM_VAL1 = 1; > + ANENUM_VAL1 = 1 > [(enumval_opt1)=100,(enumval_opt1)=101,(enumval_opt1)=102]; > ANENUM_VAL2 = 2; > } > } Parsing note: There must be at least one assignment between the square brackets, like field options. So ANENUM_VAL2 = 2 []; would be invalid. I will hold off polishing and releasing a new version until I can test against the official 2.0.3 code. Cheers, Chris --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---