Joshua Haberman
Joshua Haberman
I chatted with some people on the team, and I don't think we intended for user builds to get `-Werror`. I think we'd prefer to remove `-Werror` from the build...
Sorry for the delay. I think this is a good direction, and I appreciate the small and incremental PR. I think we should move forward with this. It looks like...
https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/pull/15881 has a much greater scope, and I think we'd need to individually evaluate its many parts. I'm convinced that we want a `.rbs` code generator that has static types...
Those arguments make sense to me, but we also have to balance the benefits against the maintenance cost. The primary motivation for introducing type signatures for generated code is to...
I totally agree. If anything, I'm arguing to limit the scope of each individual PR and make things as incremental as possible.
I ran the tests, looks like the build failed.
> @haberman is it possible for the bot not to remove the "safe for tests" label? Unfortunately not, the purpose of the tag is to visually verify each commit to...
Could we add a disclaimer in the generated `.rbs` files? ```ruby # This RBS interface is provided for convenience, on a best-effort basis. # The library is the definitive source...
I'm not seeing this warning in the `.rbs` files or in the code generator. Am I missing something?
> @haberman - does Java Protobuf handle float precision differently, or is this specific to JRuby's use of it? I suspect this is specific to JRuby's use. I suspect that...