[protobuf] Re: Custom FieldOptions extensions in C++

I noticed that this morning. the protobuf syntax looks enough like C+ + that it can make it difficult to spot C++ code and distinguish it from the protobuf examples on the same page. I wonder if it might be a good idea to make the C++/Java/Python code in the docs a different color than the protob

[protobuf] Re: Custom FieldOptions extensions in C++

Well you can take in the language guide http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/proto.html#options where it talks about custom options. It's just below the Options section. This shows how to do it for a message and you'll be using the FieldDescriptor to do this. One more thing to note i

[protobuf] Re: Custom FieldOptions extensions in C++

Well you can take in the language guide http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/proto.html#options where it talks about custom options. It's just below the Options section. This shows how to do it for a message and you'll be using the FieldDescriptor to do this. One more thing to note i

Re: [protobuf] protosharp project seems stale

that could also just mean "stable and not needing massive work" - there haven't been any significant changes to the protobuf format since packed arrays (the most recent commit). (I honestly don't know either way; I just don't think it is quite safe to assume lack of activity means "abandoned" here

[protobuf] protosharp project seems stale

Hi, the add-on pagelists a C# protosharp project at http://code.google.com/p/protosharp/ and it seems the project has gone stale (only one minor update in the last year, and low usage). Please mark it as such to aid new users. Thanks! --

[protobuf] Custom FieldOptions extensions in C++

I'm trying to develop a framework for accessing a mysql database, by automatically generating a .proto file from the tables, with full support for foreign key relationships, and I use extensions to the FieldOptions message type to tag the various fields with the relevant foreign key reference infor

[protobuf] Re: Issue 330 in protobuf: add the possiblity to choose TextFormat default printer in java

Comment #3 on issue 330 by pop.atry: add the possiblity to choose TextFormat default printer in java http://code.google.com/p/protobuf/issues/detail?id=330 The overhead is trivial because JVM will inline temporary object if you runs that code many times. -- You received this message becau