3 ms·
> Yes it is for the protoc generated code. It would be nice if the protobuf spec allowed for something like tags as well. Have you seen Protobuf options [1]? T
by q3k 7y ago
> Yes it is for the protoc generated code. It would be nice if the protobuf spec allowed for something like tags as well.
Have you seen Protobuf options [1]? They allow for a tag-like-behaviour, but are strongly typed. It's notably used by gogoproto [2] to allow specifying custom field types or names [3] when generating Go stubs.
[1] - https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto#customoptions https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto#cu...
[2] - https://github.com/gogo/protobuf https://github.com/gogo/protobuf
[3] - https://godoc.org/github.com/gogo/protobuf/gogoproto https://godoc.org/github.com/gogo/protobuf/gogoproto
- seiferteric 7y agoThanks, I have looked at options. I think it could work, but I think it would require writing a custom marshal/unmarshal function for each protobuf struct, even if they are essentially the same for each one. I will have to take a closer look at the links though.
- seiferteric 7y agogogoproto worked for me, using the moretags extension, thanks for the links!