Apologies for the delay. I don't, but the basic sketch would be:
- define a custom option by extending google.protobuf.FieldOptions
- Implement a code generator that opens the files generated by the main
generators
- Modify your build system to execute protoc with both the language specific
target
Sounds interesting, do you have an example of doing this?
On Jul 9, 2:21 am, Jason Hsueh wrote:
> Echoing Chris's messages, we don't really want to get into supporting
> arbitrary types in the core implementation. Various language-specific
> annotations could be added, but doing this portably acr
Echoing Chris's messages, we don't really want to get into supporting
arbitrary types in the core implementation. Various language-specific
annotations could be added, but doing this portably across languages would
be difficult. Supporting these types also complicate the reflection
implementations.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Eric Hopper wrote:
> I guess. This is an interesting and general problem. Practically every
> system like protobuf needs to solve it. Python itself, for example,
> solves it for pickle by allowing you to write custom methods for your
> classes to reduce them to well
On Jun 30, 10:16 am, Christopher Smith wrote:
> You could always extend the compiler, but I bet you could get away with a
> simple preprocessor that aliases types and represents those larger integers
> as raw bytes.
I guess. This is an interesting and general problem. Practically every
system l
