2010/10/6 Kenton Varda :
> This exception shouldn't be possible.
> If you can produce a small, self-contained program that demonstrates the
> problem, I could debug it. Please make sure that the program is small (no
> more than one .proto file and one source file) and runs quickly. Probably
> the
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Michael wrote:
>
> int compare(byte[] b1, int s1,
> byte[] b2, int s2,
> Descriptors.Descriptor type)
>
> I would love a method like this one. It would allow messages to be
> used as keys in without the need fo
Fair enough.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> Unfortunately, we (read: I) don't really have time to chase warnings. If
> you want it fixed, submit a patch. Otherwise, ignore it -- the code does
> the right thing.
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Jesper wrote:
>>
>> The
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Henner Zeller wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 01:16, Jesper wrote:
>>
>> The Eclipse Java compiler issues a warning about a raw type:
>>
>> Description Resource Path Location Type
>> GeneratedMessage.ExtendableMessage.ExtensionWriter is a raw
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> You want:
> const UnknownFieldSet& set = cmd.GetReflection()->GetUnknownFields(cmd);
Ok, so if I have function which receives a message which as an unknown
field which I need to parse into a "real" message, how should I do?
(The documentatio
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> To answer your specific question, BTW, yes, you can inspect the contents of
> UnknownFieldSet. Every message object has methods unknown_fields() and
> mutable_unkown_fields() which return the UnknownFieldSet. The API is
> described here:
>
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> Ouch, this hole is probably a lot deeper than it looks.
> First let me review some things which you may already know...
> I assume these "plugins" are DLLs. Do you load and unload these plugins at
> runtime, or just at startup? If you unload
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> Yep, it's a very annoying problem. The solution I prefer is to add a dummy
> usage of one of the classes in your .proto somewhere high-up in your
> program, in a place that should logically "know" that the file is needed.
This is really not
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> Some linkers will drop object files that aren't referenced from anywhere, so
> if your code doesn't actually use anything from the .proto file defining the
> extension, it might not be linked in, and thus won't be in the registry.
> This is
I keep clicking on "reply" instead of "reply all"...
-- Forwarded message ------
From: Jesper Eskilson
Date: Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: Parsing messages in C++ with extensions
To: Kenton Varda
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Kenton Varda w
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> In C++ all compiled-in extensions are automatically registered in a global
> registry which is used automatically by all compiled-in classes. I now
> regret this design decision due to a number of subtle problems it creates,
> but for you it
How do you parse a message from a byte-steam which contains
extensions? In Java, I can do
ExtensionRegistry registry = ...
registry.add(...);
Foo.parseFrom(buf, registry)
but I can't find any reference on how to do this in C++.
--
/Jesper
--~--~-~--~~~-
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Jesper Eskilson wrote:
> I'm getting a C++ template error message I'm having trouble
> understanding. I have two .proto files, one called "cdp.proto" which
> defines ServiceCommand:
Problem solved. I realized that I need to use the G
I'm getting a C++ template error message I'm having trouble
understanding. I have two .proto files, one called "cdp.proto" which
defines ServiceCommand:
message ServiceCommand
{
...
extensions 200 to max;
}
This is then extended in "libsupport.proto", like this:
message LibSupportMessage {
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Mr Moose wrote:
>
> It is found!
>
> After 4 interesting days of debugging the bastard I realized that I
> rercently had to add 3 preprocessor defines to my build system:
>
> _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS
> _SECURE_SCL=0
> _HAS_ITERATOR_DEBUGGING=0
>
> If they are missi
(Sorry Kenton, I missed adding the list as recipient...)
We're using a very simple approach where we send only one type of
message containing a type-enum and one or more optional fields (I
think this technique is described in the manual). In order to be able
to read the message in full before par
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
>> My thinking on the current format is that Java developers are going to
>> look at this and be all WTF and then walk away... maybe it's just
>> me ;)
>
> That's not the reaction I've seen from most Java devs.
+1 from me. The protobufs
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 8:08 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Jesper Eskilson wrote:
>>
>> (BTW: I created a set of CMake (http://cmake.org) build files for
>> Protobufs, in case you're interested in not maintaining parallell
>> M
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Kenton Varda wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Jesper wrote:
>>
>> I think so, but I'll double-check. (Wouldn't that have showed up when
>> libprotobuf.lib was linked into the exe?)
>
> Unfortunately, probably not. Strange crashes at runtime are the usua
I have libprotobuf.lib linked into a DLL, and when loading the DLL, I
get the following crash. (Noteworthy is that I previously hade the
same code linked into a single exe, and then it worked without any
problem.)
Any clues about how I can solve this?
CSpyServerLib.dll!
std::_Tree,std::allocator
20 matches
Mail list logo
