On Jan 7, 8:18 pm, Kenton Varda wrote:
> IMO, there's not much reason to use the protobuf wire format unless you
> explicitly intend for some users to read/write the format using actual
> protocol buffers.
Not entirely sure what you mean. This will probably get a lot clearer
once we get Mike's
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Alek Storm wrote:
>
> Right, I guess I didn't explain why they don't work in this case.
> Generating .proto files from C++ headers is obviously the reverse of
> the normal sequence. In the PB method of versioning, the
> original .proto is written and deployed. Th
Right, I guess I didn't explain why they don't work in this case.
Generating .proto files from C++ headers is obviously the reverse of
the normal sequence. In the PB method of versioning, the
original .proto is written and deployed. The next version then writes
an extension of the original. If
Protocol buffers are useful even if all users are using the same language.
In fact, we used them in C++ for some time before anyone bothered writing
Java and Python implementations.
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Alek Storm wrote:
>
> Mike, what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Do you ju
Mike, what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Do you just want to
persist a C++ class? If so, you don't need to generate a .proto file,
because other languages won't need to read it, and you know your own
encoding layout. So you could still use the Protocol Buffers wire
format.
--~--~---
On Jan 7, 4:21 pm, Kenton Varda wrote:
> SWIG translates C/C++ APIs into other programming languages. Protocol
> Buffers is not a programming language, so I don't see the analogy. What
> would be the protocol buffer equivalent of a C function or a C++ class?
Technically, SWIG generates wrapper
SWIG translates C/C++ APIs into other programming languages. Protocol
Buffers is not a programming language, so I don't see the analogy. What
would be the protocol buffer equivalent of a C function or a C++ class?
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 2:00 PM, mikesparr...@gmail.com <
mikesparr...@gmail.com> w
SWIG is an example of a project that does something in the same vein.
On Jan 7, 1:50 pm, Kenton Varda wrote:
> How would that work, exactly?
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:50 AM, mikesparr...@gmail.com <
>
> mikesparr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is there an existing convert that can take a header
How would that work, exactly?
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:50 AM, mikesparr...@gmail.com <
mikesparr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Is there an existing convert that can take a header file and produce
> a .proto file?
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message b
Is there an existing convert that can take a header file and produce
a .proto file?
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.
10 matches
Mail list logo
