On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:28 PM, dound <doun...@gmail.com> wrote: > 1) An option to prefix a length field to each message. This would > make it possible to serialize/deserialize a stream of bytes (e.g., a > TCP socket).
This is sort of out of scope of what protobuf does. It should be handled by whatever RPC framework you use, or handled by hand in whatever protocol you use to send things over the network, or save things to files, or whatever you're doing with your protobuf objects. > 2) An option for prefixing a type field to each message -- this makes > it possible to tell what message type is coming over a stream of > bytes. This is useful in some cases where you expect a message but > don't know what kind. Kenton, please correct me if I'm wrong, but if the receiving end had the same compiled code as the sending end you can ask the Message object for it's Descriptor, which contains information about the message including it's name. If that is not true, you can create a wrapper message that contains the name of the object. > > Thanks for a great tool! > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
