Index: third_party/protobuf/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h |
diff --git a/third_party/protobuf/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h b/third_party/protobuf/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h |
index 07e60818522d01360790647903afc78cb9d7cb03..73cbd8a58508f7254558c655a8f0e75aa6101fc6 100644 |
--- a/third_party/protobuf/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h |
+++ b/third_party/protobuf/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h |
@@ -1,23 +1,10 @@ |
// Generated by the protocol buffer compiler. DO NOT EDIT! |
// source: google/protobuf/field_mask.proto |
-// This CPP symbol can be defined to use imports that match up to the framework |
-// imports needed when using CocoaPods. |
-#if !defined(GPB_USE_PROTOBUF_FRAMEWORK_IMPORTS) |
- #define GPB_USE_PROTOBUF_FRAMEWORK_IMPORTS 0 |
-#endif |
- |
-#if GPB_USE_PROTOBUF_FRAMEWORK_IMPORTS |
- #import <Protobuf/GPBProtocolBuffers.h> |
-#else |
- #import "GPBProtocolBuffers.h" |
-#endif |
+#import "GPBProtocolBuffers.h" |
-#if GOOGLE_PROTOBUF_OBJC_VERSION < 30002 |
-#error This file was generated by a newer version of protoc which is incompatible with your Protocol Buffer library sources. |
-#endif |
-#if 30002 < GOOGLE_PROTOBUF_OBJC_MIN_SUPPORTED_VERSION |
-#error This file was generated by an older version of protoc which is incompatible with your Protocol Buffer library sources. |
+#if GOOGLE_PROTOBUF_OBJC_GEN_VERSION != 30001 |
+#error This file was generated by a different version of protoc which is incompatible with your Protocol Buffer library sources. |
#endif |
// @@protoc_insertion_point(imports) |
@@ -31,16 +18,14 @@ NS_ASSUME_NONNULL_BEGIN |
#pragma mark - GPBFieldMaskRoot |
-/** |
- * Exposes the extension registry for this file. |
- * |
- * The base class provides: |
- * @code |
- * + (GPBExtensionRegistry *)extensionRegistry; |
- * @endcode |
- * which is a @c GPBExtensionRegistry that includes all the extensions defined by |
- * this file and all files that it depends on. |
- **/ |
+/// Exposes the extension registry for this file. |
+/// |
+/// The base class provides: |
+/// @code |
+/// + (GPBExtensionRegistry *)extensionRegistry; |
+/// @endcode |
+/// which is a @c GPBExtensionRegistry that includes all the extensions defined by |
+/// this file and all files that it depends on. |
@interface GPBFieldMaskRoot : GPBRootObject |
@end |
@@ -50,214 +35,160 @@ typedef GPB_ENUM(GPBFieldMask_FieldNumber) { |
GPBFieldMask_FieldNumber_PathsArray = 1, |
}; |
-/** |
- * `FieldMask` represents a set of symbolic field paths, for example: |
- * |
- * paths: "f.a" |
- * paths: "f.b.d" |
- * |
- * Here `f` represents a field in some root message, `a` and `b` |
- * fields in the message found in `f`, and `d` a field found in the |
- * message in `f.b`. |
- * |
- * Field masks are used to specify a subset of fields that should be |
- * returned by a get operation or modified by an update operation. |
- * Field masks also have a custom JSON encoding (see below). |
- * |
- * # Field Masks in Projections |
- * |
- * When used in the context of a projection, a response message or |
- * sub-message is filtered by the API to only contain those fields as |
- * specified in the mask. For example, if the mask in the previous |
- * example is applied to a response message as follows: |
- * |
- * f { |
- * a : 22 |
- * b { |
- * d : 1 |
- * x : 2 |
- * } |
- * y : 13 |
- * } |
- * z: 8 |
- * |
- * The result will not contain specific values for fields x,y and z |
- * (their value will be set to the default, and omitted in proto text |
- * output): |
- * |
- * |
- * f { |
- * a : 22 |
- * b { |
- * d : 1 |
- * } |
- * } |
- * |
- * A repeated field is not allowed except at the last position of a |
- * paths string. |
- * |
- * If a FieldMask object is not present in a get operation, the |
- * operation applies to all fields (as if a FieldMask of all fields |
- * had been specified). |
- * |
- * Note that a field mask does not necessarily apply to the |
- * top-level response message. In case of a REST get operation, the |
- * field mask applies directly to the response, but in case of a REST |
- * list operation, the mask instead applies to each individual message |
- * in the returned resource list. In case of a REST custom method, |
- * other definitions may be used. Where the mask applies will be |
- * clearly documented together with its declaration in the API. In |
- * any case, the effect on the returned resource/resources is required |
- * behavior for APIs. |
- * |
- * # Field Masks in Update Operations |
- * |
- * A field mask in update operations specifies which fields of the |
- * targeted resource are going to be updated. The API is required |
- * to only change the values of the fields as specified in the mask |
- * and leave the others untouched. If a resource is passed in to |
- * describe the updated values, the API ignores the values of all |
- * fields not covered by the mask. |
- * |
- * If a repeated field is specified for an update operation, the existing |
- * repeated values in the target resource will be overwritten by the new values. |
- * Note that a repeated field is only allowed in the last position of a `paths` |
- * string. |
- * |
- * If a sub-message is specified in the last position of the field mask for an |
- * update operation, then the existing sub-message in the target resource is |
- * overwritten. Given the target message: |
- * |
- * f { |
- * b { |
- * d : 1 |
- * x : 2 |
- * } |
- * c : 1 |
- * } |
- * |
- * And an update message: |
- * |
- * f { |
- * b { |
- * d : 10 |
- * } |
- * } |
- * |
- * then if the field mask is: |
- * |
- * paths: "f.b" |
- * |
- * then the result will be: |
- * |
- * f { |
- * b { |
- * d : 10 |
- * } |
- * c : 1 |
- * } |
- * |
- * However, if the update mask was: |
- * |
- * paths: "f.b.d" |
- * |
- * then the result would be: |
- * |
- * f { |
- * b { |
- * d : 10 |
- * x : 2 |
- * } |
- * c : 1 |
- * } |
- * |
- * In order to reset a field's value to the default, the field must |
- * be in the mask and set to the default value in the provided resource. |
- * Hence, in order to reset all fields of a resource, provide a default |
- * instance of the resource and set all fields in the mask, or do |
- * not provide a mask as described below. |
- * |
- * If a field mask is not present on update, the operation applies to |
- * all fields (as if a field mask of all fields has been specified). |
- * Note that in the presence of schema evolution, this may mean that |
- * fields the client does not know and has therefore not filled into |
- * the request will be reset to their default. If this is unwanted |
- * behavior, a specific service may require a client to always specify |
- * a field mask, producing an error if not. |
- * |
- * As with get operations, the location of the resource which |
- * describes the updated values in the request message depends on the |
- * operation kind. In any case, the effect of the field mask is |
- * required to be honored by the API. |
- * |
- * ## Considerations for HTTP REST |
- * |
- * The HTTP kind of an update operation which uses a field mask must |
- * be set to PATCH instead of PUT in order to satisfy HTTP semantics |
- * (PUT must only be used for full updates). |
- * |
- * # JSON Encoding of Field Masks |
- * |
- * In JSON, a field mask is encoded as a single string where paths are |
- * separated by a comma. Fields name in each path are converted |
- * to/from lower-camel naming conventions. |
- * |
- * As an example, consider the following message declarations: |
- * |
- * message Profile { |
- * User user = 1; |
- * Photo photo = 2; |
- * } |
- * message User { |
- * string display_name = 1; |
- * string address = 2; |
- * } |
- * |
- * In proto a field mask for `Profile` may look as such: |
- * |
- * mask { |
- * paths: "user.display_name" |
- * paths: "photo" |
- * } |
- * |
- * In JSON, the same mask is represented as below: |
- * |
- * { |
- * mask: "user.displayName,photo" |
- * } |
- * |
- * # Field Masks and Oneof Fields |
- * |
- * Field masks treat fields in oneofs just as regular fields. Consider the |
- * following message: |
- * |
- * message SampleMessage { |
- * oneof test_oneof { |
- * string name = 4; |
- * SubMessage sub_message = 9; |
- * } |
- * } |
- * |
- * The field mask can be: |
- * |
- * mask { |
- * paths: "name" |
- * } |
- * |
- * Or: |
- * |
- * mask { |
- * paths: "sub_message" |
- * } |
- * |
- * Note that oneof type names ("test_oneof" in this case) cannot be used in |
- * paths. |
- **/ |
+/// `FieldMask` represents a set of symbolic field paths, for example: |
+/// |
+/// paths: "f.a" |
+/// paths: "f.b.d" |
+/// |
+/// Here `f` represents a field in some root message, `a` and `b` |
+/// fields in the message found in `f`, and `d` a field found in the |
+/// message in `f.b`. |
+/// |
+/// Field masks are used to specify a subset of fields that should be |
+/// returned by a get operation or modified by an update operation. |
+/// Field masks also have a custom JSON encoding (see below). |
+/// |
+/// # Field Masks in Projections |
+/// |
+/// When used in the context of a projection, a response message or |
+/// sub-message is filtered by the API to only contain those fields as |
+/// specified in the mask. For example, if the mask in the previous |
+/// example is applied to a response message as follows: |
+/// |
+/// f { |
+/// a : 22 |
+/// b { |
+/// d : 1 |
+/// x : 2 |
+/// } |
+/// y : 13 |
+/// } |
+/// z: 8 |
+/// |
+/// The result will not contain specific values for fields x,y and z |
+/// (their value will be set to the default, and omitted in proto text |
+/// output): |
+/// |
+/// |
+/// f { |
+/// a : 22 |
+/// b { |
+/// d : 1 |
+/// } |
+/// } |
+/// |
+/// A repeated field is not allowed except at the last position of a |
+/// field mask. |
+/// |
+/// If a FieldMask object is not present in a get operation, the |
+/// operation applies to all fields (as if a FieldMask of all fields |
+/// had been specified). |
+/// |
+/// Note that a field mask does not necessarily apply to the |
+/// top-level response message. In case of a REST get operation, the |
+/// field mask applies directly to the response, but in case of a REST |
+/// list operation, the mask instead applies to each individual message |
+/// in the returned resource list. In case of a REST custom method, |
+/// other definitions may be used. Where the mask applies will be |
+/// clearly documented together with its declaration in the API. In |
+/// any case, the effect on the returned resource/resources is required |
+/// behavior for APIs. |
+/// |
+/// # Field Masks in Update Operations |
+/// |
+/// A field mask in update operations specifies which fields of the |
+/// targeted resource are going to be updated. The API is required |
+/// to only change the values of the fields as specified in the mask |
+/// and leave the others untouched. If a resource is passed in to |
+/// describe the updated values, the API ignores the values of all |
+/// fields not covered by the mask. |
+/// |
+/// In order to reset a field's value to the default, the field must |
+/// be in the mask and set to the default value in the provided resource. |
+/// Hence, in order to reset all fields of a resource, provide a default |
+/// instance of the resource and set all fields in the mask, or do |
+/// not provide a mask as described below. |
+/// |
+/// If a field mask is not present on update, the operation applies to |
+/// all fields (as if a field mask of all fields has been specified). |
+/// Note that in the presence of schema evolution, this may mean that |
+/// fields the client does not know and has therefore not filled into |
+/// the request will be reset to their default. If this is unwanted |
+/// behavior, a specific service may require a client to always specify |
+/// a field mask, producing an error if not. |
+/// |
+/// As with get operations, the location of the resource which |
+/// describes the updated values in the request message depends on the |
+/// operation kind. In any case, the effect of the field mask is |
+/// required to be honored by the API. |
+/// |
+/// ## Considerations for HTTP REST |
+/// |
+/// The HTTP kind of an update operation which uses a field mask must |
+/// be set to PATCH instead of PUT in order to satisfy HTTP semantics |
+/// (PUT must only be used for full updates). |
+/// |
+/// # JSON Encoding of Field Masks |
+/// |
+/// In JSON, a field mask is encoded as a single string where paths are |
+/// separated by a comma. Fields name in each path are converted |
+/// to/from lower-camel naming conventions. |
+/// |
+/// As an example, consider the following message declarations: |
+/// |
+/// message Profile { |
+/// User user = 1; |
+/// Photo photo = 2; |
+/// } |
+/// message User { |
+/// string display_name = 1; |
+/// string address = 2; |
+/// } |
+/// |
+/// In proto a field mask for `Profile` may look as such: |
+/// |
+/// mask { |
+/// paths: "user.display_name" |
+/// paths: "photo" |
+/// } |
+/// |
+/// In JSON, the same mask is represented as below: |
+/// |
+/// { |
+/// mask: "user.displayName,photo" |
+/// } |
+/// |
+/// # Field Masks and Oneof Fields |
+/// |
+/// Field masks treat fields in oneofs just as regular fields. Consider the |
+/// following message: |
+/// |
+/// message SampleMessage { |
+/// oneof test_oneof { |
+/// string name = 4; |
+/// SubMessage sub_message = 9; |
+/// } |
+/// } |
+/// |
+/// The field mask can be: |
+/// |
+/// mask { |
+/// paths: "name" |
+/// } |
+/// |
+/// Or: |
+/// |
+/// mask { |
+/// paths: "sub_message" |
+/// } |
+/// |
+/// Note that oneof type names ("test_oneof" in this case) cannot be used in |
+/// paths. |
@interface GPBFieldMask : GPBMessage |
-/** The set of field mask paths. */ |
+/// The set of field mask paths. |
@property(nonatomic, readwrite, strong, null_resettable) NSMutableArray<NSString*> *pathsArray; |
-/** The number of items in @c pathsArray without causing the array to be created. */ |
+/// The number of items in @c pathsArray without causing the array to be created. |
@property(nonatomic, readonly) NSUInteger pathsArray_Count; |
@end |