Re: Repeated message field in c pacakge

2008-12-03 Thread osishkin
Thank you very much Dave for your quick and detailed replies I'll try that out soon. Aviad On 1 דצמבר, 04:50, daveb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BTW: I just released protobuf-c 0.6 which include the item__init() function (and it also supports default-values properly now). - dave On Nov 27,

Slicing support in Python

2008-12-03 Thread Alek Storm
(Okay, back on track) On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:17 PM, Kenton Varda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 11:08 PM, Alek Storm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would think encoding and decoding would be the main bottlenecks, so can't those be wrappers around C++, while let object

Re: Protocol Buffers Compiler Maven Plug-In

2008-12-03 Thread Gregory Kick
The intertubes have led you to the right place. This has actually been done for a while, but I haven't written the tests (arg!). I'll definitely get it checked in by the end of the year. Sorry for the procrastination. On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Kenton Varda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [cc

Re: Slicing support in Python

2008-12-03 Thread Dave Bailey
On Dec 2, 10:49 pm, Kenton Varda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: C++ compatibility matters because eventually we want to be able to generate Python code which just wraps C++ code for efficiency.  C++ isn't garbage collected, so append() can't easily be implemented in this case without having

Re: Slicing support in Python

2008-12-03 Thread Kenton Varda
Ehhh... Reference counting is slow (assuming it needs to be thread-safe), and I think even adding it as an option would add an excessive amount of complication to the system. On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Dave Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 2:00 pm, Dave Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Slicing support in Python

2008-12-03 Thread Kenton Varda
It still adds a lot of complication. And I think most cases where people start out thinking thread-safety won't be an issue, particularly with reference counting, they later find out otherwise. On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Dave Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What if thread safety wasn't