protobuf

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Joshua Haberman	6b5fb807c0	Sync from Piper @310858019 PROTOBUF_SYNC_PIPER	5 years ago
Joshua Haberman	32e5deb1ac	Sync from Piper @308829107 PROTOBUF_SYNC_PIPER	5 years ago
Jon Skeet	97737072f9	Add reflection support for proto3 optional fields This is more involved than might be expected because the synthetic oneofs don't generate the properties we would usually expect to see.	5 years ago
Sydney Acksman	930db675ca	Revert changes for FieldPresenceAccessor	6 years ago
Sydney Acksman	47f2017cf3	Review changes * Add Syntax enum and make file syntax checks check the enum * Made IsPacked a normal get method without ternary op * Moved IFieldAccessor.HasValue to IFieldPresenceAccessor * Change naming of GetIsExtensionsInitialized * Fixed stray text in summary text	6 years ago
Sydney Acksman	6b90ac13e0	Reorganize some tests	6 years ago
Sydney Acksman	bf4f6c5431	Make extension reflection helper use GetOrRegisterExtension	6 years ago
Sydney Acksman	9163a6f1ad	Add tests for extension accessor	6 years ago
Xiang Dai	e479410564	delete all duplicate empty blanks (#5758 ) Signed-off-by: Xiang Dai <764524258@qq.com>	6 years ago
Jon Skeet	84ea2c7a81	Regenerate all C# code and make it compile JSON tests fail, as we're not using OriginalNameAttribute yet.	9 years ago
Jon Skeet	547d8e8221	Make FieldDescriptor.IsPacked work appropriately. This is a bit of a grotty hack, as we need to sort of fake proto2 field presence, but with only a proto3 version of the descriptor messages (a bit like oneof detection). Should be okay, but will need to be careful of this if we ever implement proto2.	10 years ago
Jon Skeet	c1c6b2d0d5	Implemented Jan's suggestion of FieldCollection, replacing FieldAccessorCollection. I think Jan was actually suggesting keeping both, but that feels redundant to me. The test diff is misleading here IMO, because I wouldn't expect real code using reflection to use several accessors one after another like this, unless it was within a loop. Evidence to the contrary would be welcome :) This change also incidentally goes part way to fixing the issue of the JSON formatter not writing out the fields in field number order - with this change, it does except for oneofs, which we can fix in a follow-up change. I haven't actually added a test with a message with fields deliberately out of order - I'm happy to do so though. It feels like it would make sense to be in google/src/protobuf, but it's not entirely clear what the rules of engagement are for adding new messages there. (unittest_proto3.proto?)	10 years ago
Jon Skeet	20bf6a563a	First pass at making field access simpler. This is definitely not ready to ship - I'm "troubled" by the disconnect between a list of fields in declaration order, and a mapping of field accessors by field number/name. Discussion required, but I find that easier when we've got code to look at :)	10 years ago

12 Commits (6b5fb807c00603ff3fbb392d2a002fac2444d5c5)