t;
> Greg
>
> *From:* Jason Hsueh
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 07, 2010 1:55 PM
> *To:* Louis-Marie
> *Cc:* Kenton Varda ; protobuf@googlegroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [protobuf] Python installation does not build plugin_pb2
>
> As Kenton said, including plugin.proto
a preferred workaround? (And I don't think forcing the use of a program
packager like PyInstaller is the correct route either.)
Greg
From: Jason Hsueh
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 1:55 PM
To: Louis-Marie
Cc: Kenton Varda ; protobuf@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [protobuf] Python
As Kenton said, including plugin.proto would bloat the core library. Only
people implementing proto compilers such as yourself need to use it.
On the C++ side, you would typically just build a statically linked binary
that has all of the plugin generated code linked in. It's not included in
the C+
Thanks for your answer.
To give you a little bit more information, here's what I'm trying to
do. I want to deliver a tool using a custom protoc plugin implemented
in python, so that end user can generate code from its own proto
files.
There would be nothing special to do before using this plugin,
It's not generated because none of the python implementation actually uses
it. So, generating it and including it in the egg would just increase the
library size for everyone, when most people don't need it.
What makes you feel uncomfortable about generating it yourself?
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 6
Hi all,
It looks like python installation of protocol buffers does not
generate the google.protobuf.compiler.plugin_pb2 python file, while
google.protobuf.descriptor_pb2 is explicitly generated by
protobuf/python/setup.py
generate_proto("../src/google/protobuf/descriptor.proto")
Shouldn't the
