Reverts third_party/protobuf: Update to HEAD (f52e188fe4)

third_party/protobuf/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h

 // 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
+#import "GPBProtocolBuffers.h"
 
-#if GPB_USE_PROTOBUF_FRAMEWORK_IMPORTS
- #import <Protobuf/GPBProtocolBuffers.h>
-#else
- #import "GPBProtocolBuffers.h"
-#endif
-
-#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)
 
 #pragma clang diagnostic push
 #pragma clang diagnostic ignored "-Wdeprecated-declarations"
 
 CF_EXTERN_C_BEGIN
 
 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
 
 #pragma mark - GPBFieldMask
 
 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
 
 NS_ASSUME_NONNULL_END
 
 CF_EXTERN_C_END
 
 #pragma clang diagnostic pop
 
 // @@protoc_insertion_point(global_scope)