exprotobuf
exprotobuf copied to clipboard
bitwalker
Protocol Buffers in Elixir made easy!
Encoding integer values of out the specified range (overflow) results in an invalid binary which crashes the decoding in a way that is very hard to troubleshoot. It's best if...
gpb changed the occurence field from optional to defaulty before version 4.13 (see https://github.com/tomas-abrahamsson/gpb/commit/a3633259d7a41e16fd2c83fab2f13d64265817f8). This made Exprotobuf fail when compiling protobufs with gpb >= 4.13.
The `:reserved_numbers` token from `gpb` was not supported and prevented a Google protobuf file to be read (even though it worked on one of my fork but I cannot identify...
Crash message: ``` == Compilation error in file lib/astarte_rpc/protocol/data_updater_plant.ex == ** (CaseClauseError) no case clause matching: %Protobuf.Field{fnum: 1, name: :version, occurrence: :defaulty, opts: [], rnum: 2, type: :int32} lib/exprotobuf/define_message.ex:147: Protobuf.DefineMessage.define_trivial_typespec_fields/2...
I consider the functions in `:gpb_parse` and `:gpb_scan` to be internal to gpb, but exprotobuf uses them for parsing. I'm intending to change gpb_parse and gpb_scan in an upcoming rewrite...
The current implementation mistakenly uses `reserved_numbers` tuples coming from `gpb` as `proto3_msg`, since the `name` in the tuple matches the one used in the proper `message` definition. The commit simply...
Hello, I found that when the proto file contains a "reserved field" will cause the encode and decode fucntion fail. This this the demo project I created. [demo](https://github.com/rm1138/Exportbuf-Demo) Thanks
I've had a problem when decoding a nested structure with oneof fields. When calling the function defs/2 with :field and the fileld name of the oneof field, the def of...
Is there a way to link this into ex_doc such that the message structure is included in the generated documentation? For example ``` defmodule Messages do @moduledoc """ Some documentation...
I opened this PR after we noticed that some messages containing `Any` and `OneOf` messages weren't being type checked if given incorrect values. After some poking, it seemed to be...
