4 ms·
That's true for "singular" fields, but not "optional". https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto3#specifying_field_rules https://developers.goo
by tantalor 4y ago
That's true for "singular" fields, but not "optional".
https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto3#specifying_field_rules https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto3#s...
If you don't like that, don't use "singular".
- fuzzy2 4y agooptional or repeated are not semantically correct for a required field though. I’d rather not pollute the contract this way. It doesn’t lend itself to automatically generating documentation from the schema either. Guess I’ll take another look at proto2 then.