Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

Hi Joe, Thats, great to know! Thanks!! Regards dharani On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 10:40 AM Joe Tsai wrote: > The merge has happened on pull request #591 > . > > JT > > On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 4:01 PM Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan < > vdhar...@gmail.com> wr

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

The merge has happened on pull request #591 . JT On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 4:01 PM Tharaneedharan Vilwanathan < vdhar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > Can someone share some details on this code merge? Has this happened? How > can I play with it? > > T

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

Hi All, Can someone share some details on this code merge? Has this happened? How can I play with it? Thanks dharani ** *Hello gophers,* *This is an announcement that we will be merging the dev branch of github.com/golang/protobuf into mast

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

I'm hugely in favor of bringing the gogoproto enhancements into golang/protobuf, as a spectator to this discussion. I'm not sure what requirements would put generated binary size over marshalling speed, but maybe I haven't worked on large enough projects yet. We have used gogoproto for about 2

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

I cannot recall that I have experienced these problems. The generated code has also been far easier to maintain than the runtime reflected code that is repeatedly patched by golang/protobuf. Except for import paths, this is probably one of the easiest projects a developer will get to work on. It is

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

Surely these issues already exist in gogo-protobuf? How are they handled there? On Thu, Feb 1, 2018, 08:28 'Jisi Liu' via golang-nuts < golang-nuts@googlegroups.com> wrote: > This is not Java specific. I just used Java as an example. For most > protobuf implementations, there is a contract betwee

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

This is not Java specific. I just used Java as an example. For most protobuf implementations, there is a contract between the runtime and generated code which is not meant to be public. e.g. In go-protobuf, runtime expects the generated classes define some internal fields, like XXX_unrecognized, an

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

Could we perhaps get a code snippet example that non java programmers can follow. PS When I previously referred to java programmers as real software developers, I didn't add some much needed context. Sometimes in this java dominated world I personally don't feel like a real software developer.

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

On Wednesday, January 31, 2018 at 11:20:31 AM UTC-8, Walter Schulze wrote: > > Hi JT please see my inline replies. > > On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 at 19:05 > wrote: > >> Thank you, Walter, for your support. >> >> > gogo/protobuf is disappointed that golang/protobuf still thinks that >> runtime reflectio

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Upcoming Go protobuf release

Hi JT please see my inline replies. On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 at 19:05 wrote: > Thank you, Walter, for your support. > > > gogo/protobuf is disappointed that golang/protobuf still thinks that > runtime reflection is an efficient way of serializing structures. > > The table-driven implementation avoids