Indeed, this was a bug that we fixed.
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 7:04 AM, jim horng <jimho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Kenton,
>
> here are the stacktrace, i found i'm using 2.1.0
>
> java.lang.NullPointerException
>
> at
> com.google.protobuf.UnknownFieldSet$Builder.mergeFieldFrom(UnknownFieldSet.java:422)
>
> at
> com.google.protobuf.GeneratedMessage$Builder.parseUnknownField(GeneratedMessage.java:289)
>
> at
> com.trendmicro.mist.proto.MistMessage$MessageBlock$Builder.mergeFrom(MistMessage.java:621)
>
> at
> com.trendmicro.mist.proto.MistMessage$MessageBlock$Builder.mergeFrom(MistMessage.java:602)
>
> at
> com.trendmicro.mist.proto.MistMessage$MessageBlock$Builder.mergeFrom(MistMessage.java:504)
>
> at
> com.google.protobuf.AbstractMessage$Builder.mergeFrom(AbstractMessage.java:358)
>
> at
> com.google.protobuf.AbstractMessage$Builder.mergeFrom(AbstractMessage.java:351)
>
> at com.trendmicro.mist.Session.runProducer(Session.java:288)
>
> at com.trendmicro.mist.Session.run(Session.java:805)
>
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:619)
>
>
> After I switch to 2.3.0, the exception become much more reasonable:
> Exception in thread "main"
> com.google.protobuf.InvalidProtocolBufferException: Protocol message
> contained an invalid tag (zero).
> at
> com.google.protobuf.InvalidProtocolBufferException.invalidTag(InvalidProtocolBufferException.java:68)
> at
> com.google.protobuf.CodedInputStream.readTag(CodedInputStream.java:90)
> at test.Test$Person$Builder.mergeFrom(Test.java:279)
> at test.Test$Person$Builder.mergeFrom(Test.java:1)
> at
> com.google.protobuf.AbstractMessage$Builder.mergeFrom(AbstractMessage.java:244)
> at
> com.google.protobuf.AbstractMessage$Builder.mergeFrom(AbstractMessage.java:183)
> at
> com.google.protobuf.AbstractMessageLite$Builder.mergeFrom(AbstractMessageLite.java:162)
> at
> com.google.protobuf.AbstractMessage$Builder.mergeFrom(AbstractMessage.java:661)
> at
> com.google.protobuf.AbstractMessage$Builder.mergeFrom(AbstractMessage.java:183)
> at
> com.google.protobuf.AbstractMessageLite$Builder.mergeFrom(AbstractMessageLite.java:153)
> at
> com.google.protobuf.AbstractMessage$Builder.mergeFrom(AbstractMessage.java:654)
> at test.Test$Person.parseFrom(Test.java:119)
> at test.Test_pb_NPE.main(Test_pb_NPE.java:21)
>
> thanks
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> wrote:
>
>> The file you attached is not useful without source code.
>>
>> But what would be even better is if you could provide the stack trace for
>> the NullPointerException. The parser should never throw NPE and I'm not
>> aware of any bugs which cause it to throw NPE.
>>
>> BTW, it's very easy for bytes which are not actually a protocol buffer to
>> parse correctly as a protocol buffer. The protobuf encoding is pretty
>> dense. So I would suggest that you instead use some sort of tagging
>> mechanism to distinguish protobuf data from other kinds of data that you
>> need to process.
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 2:41 AM, jim horng <jimho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> It occur to me that when I'm trying to parse any of the binary data
>>> files I listed below,
>>> using <Message>.parseFrom(byte []). it said nullpointer exception.
>>>
>>> To my best knowledge, I think when the raw bytes does not contain
>>> required field, protobuf API should return invalidprotobufexception
>>> when using .parseFrom(), or at least it will throw
>>> uninitializeprotobuf exception when .build().
>>> so that client will know what happen and have change to handle them
>>> correctly.
>>> But if it return nullpointerexception, it will be hard to know what
>>> really happen, it can only be roughly assumed message parsing is
>>> failed.
>>> My goal is just to determine if the received binary files is an
>>> expected protobuf message or not.
>>>
>>> Please kindly advise or if this is work as design under some reason.
>>> Thanks a lot !
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <code snippet>
>>> String filepath = "np1.pb";
>>> byte[] file_byteary = getBytesFromFile(new File(filepath));
>>>
>>> xxx.Connection.Builder conn_builder =
>>> xxx.Connection.newBuilder();
>>> xxx.Connection MB_tmp =
>>> xxx.Connection.parseFrom(file_byteary);
>>> conn_builder.mergeFrom(MB_tmp);
>>> System.out.println("is init?" + conn_builder.isInitialized());
>>> assertTrue(conn_builder.build() != null);
>>> </code snippet>
>>>
>>> * test data
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B9CkCymjWlZLNWMyMGNiNjEtMDJiZi00NDY0LTgzMWUtMjI1N2I0MWVhNjlh&hl=en
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "Protocol Buffers" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<protobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com>
>>> .
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Jim(洪懷謙)
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to proto...@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.
