This is specifically a protobuf-net question.
In short, yes - that is fine... ish. If you add the numbers manually ***and
get them right***, then it will work. However, your example actually gets
them wrong: the protobuf-net library specifically assumes an *alphabetical*
order for the properties / fields when using ImplicitFields, because
reflection does not guarantee any particular order - see the "Remarks"
section on MSDN: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/6ztex2dc.aspx and
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/kyaxdd3x.aspx
So the order is actually: Id = 1, IsAvailable = 2, Name = 3, Quantity = 4 -
you would then add NewField1 and NewField2 as 5 and 6, presumably.
Just to quote from the documentation on ImplicitFields, too:
/// <summary>
/// Specifies the method used to infer field tags for members of the type
/// under consideration. Tags are deduced using the invariant alphabetic
/// sequence of the members' names; this makes implicit field tags
very brittle,
/// and susceptible to changes such as field names (normally an isolated
/// change).
/// </summary>
Marc
(protobuf-net)
On 15 July 2013 06:48, Pravesh Tanwar <ptan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am currently using Protobuf serializer in my C# project. Currently I am
> serializing my Objects using "
> [ProtoContract(ImplicitFields = ImplicitFields.AllPublic)]". The
> serialized objects are stored in database and deserialized when needed. I
> have now landed in a position that requires me to add new DataMembers to
> existing object. I want to be able to do this without breaking backward
> compatibility (while deserializing) of my current serialized objects.
>
> Is there a way for me to check what order does the Protobuf
> serialize/deserialize objects?
>
> e.g of the Object being serialized:
>
> [ProtoContract(ImplicitFields = ImplicitFields.AllPublic)]
>
> public class Product
> {
> [DataMember]
> public int Id { get; set; }
>
> [DataMember]
> public string Name { get; set; }
>
> [DataMember]
> public double Quantity { get; set; }
>
>
>
> [DataMember]
> public bool? IsAvailable { get; set; }
>
> }
>
> If I can know what order they are currently being serialized then I can
> use the "Order" data member attribute and make sure that the additional
> fields are ordered at the end. Hopefully this will retain backward
> compatibility while deserializing. e.g:
>
>
> public class Product
>
> {
> [DataMember(Order = 1)]
>
> public int Id { get; set; }
>
>
> [DataMember(Order = 2)]
>
> public double Quantity { get; set; }
>
>
> [DataMember(Order = 3)]
>
>
> public bool? IsAvailable { get; set; }
>
>
> [DataMember(Order = 4)]
>
> public string Name { get; set; }
>
>
> [DataMember(Order = 5)]
>
> public string NewField1 { get; set; }
>
>
> [DataMember(Order = 6)]
>
> public string NewField2 { get; set; }
>
> }
>
>
> Any ideas?
>
> --
> 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 http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>
--
Regards,
Marc
--
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 http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
