1// Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format 2// Copyright 2008 Google Inc. All rights reserved. 3// https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/ 4// 5// Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without 6// modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are 7// met: 8// 9// * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright 10// notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. 11// * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above 12// copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer 13// in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the 14// distribution. 15// * Neither the name of Google Inc. nor the names of its 16// contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from 17// this software without specific prior written permission. 18// 19// THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS 20// "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT 21// LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR 22// A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT 23// OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, 24// SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT 25// LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, 26// DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY 27// THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT 28// (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE 29// OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. 30 31// Author: benjy@google.com (Benjy Weinberger) 32// Based on original Protocol Buffers design by 33// Sanjay Ghemawat, Jeff Dean, and others. 34// 35// A proto file used to test the "custom options" feature of google.protobuf. 36 37// This file is based on unittest_custom_options.proto in 38// src/google/protobuf, but is modified for proto3. It could 39// potentially be moved into src/google/protobuf, but currently C# 40// is the only language that really needs it, as we don't support 41// proto2 syntax. It's cut down significantly as proto3 only supports 42// extensions for options. 43 44 45syntax = "proto3"; 46 47// A custom file option (defined below). 48option (file_opt1) = 9876543210; 49 50import "google/protobuf/descriptor.proto"; 51 52// We don't put this in a package within proto2 because we need to make sure 53// that the generated code doesn't depend on being in the proto2 namespace. 54package protobuf_unittest; 55option csharp_namespace = "UnitTest.Issues.TestProtos"; 56 57// Some simple test custom options of various types. 58 59extend google.protobuf.FileOptions { 60 uint64 file_opt1 = 7736974; 61} 62 63extend google.protobuf.MessageOptions { 64 int32 message_opt1 = 7739036; 65} 66 67extend google.protobuf.FieldOptions { 68 fixed64 field_opt1 = 7740936; 69} 70 71extend google.protobuf.OneofOptions { 72 int32 oneof_opt1 = 7740111; 73} 74 75extend google.protobuf.EnumOptions { 76 sfixed32 enum_opt1 = 7753576; 77} 78 79extend google.protobuf.EnumValueOptions { 80 int32 enum_value_opt1 = 1560678; 81} 82 83extend google.protobuf.ServiceOptions { 84 sint64 service_opt1 = 7887650; 85} 86 87enum MethodOpt1 { 88 METHODOPT1_UNSPECIFIED = 0; 89 METHODOPT1_VAL1 = 1; 90 METHODOPT1_VAL2 = 2; 91} 92 93extend google.protobuf.MethodOptions { 94 MethodOpt1 method_opt1 = 7890860; 95} 96 97// A test message with custom options at all possible locations (and also some 98// regular options, to make sure they interact nicely). 99message TestMessageWithCustomOptions { 100 option message_set_wire_format = false; 101 102 option (message_opt1) = -56; 103 104 string field1 = 1 [ctype=CORD, 105 (field_opt1)=8765432109]; 106 107 oneof AnOneof { 108 option (oneof_opt1) = -99; 109 int32 oneof_field = 2; 110 } 111 112 enum AnEnum { 113 option (enum_opt1) = -789; 114 ANENUM_UNSPECIFIED = 0; 115 ANENUM_VAL1 = 1; 116 ANENUM_VAL2 = 2 [(enum_value_opt1) = 123]; 117 } 118} 119 120 121// A test RPC service with custom options at all possible locations (and also 122// some regular options, to make sure they interact nicely). 123message CustomOptionFooRequest { 124} 125 126message CustomOptionFooResponse { 127} 128 129message CustomOptionFooClientMessage { 130} 131 132message CustomOptionFooServerMessage { 133} 134 135service TestServiceWithCustomOptions { 136 option (service_opt1) = -9876543210; 137 138 rpc Foo(CustomOptionFooRequest) returns (CustomOptionFooResponse) { 139 option (method_opt1) = METHODOPT1_VAL2; 140 } 141} 142 143 144 145// Options of every possible field type, so we can test them all exhaustively. 146 147message DummyMessageContainingEnum { 148 enum TestEnumType { 149 TEST_OPTION_ENUM_UNSPECIFIED = 0; 150 TEST_OPTION_ENUM_TYPE1 = 22; 151 TEST_OPTION_ENUM_TYPE2 = -23; 152 } 153} 154 155message DummyMessageInvalidAsOptionType { 156} 157 158extend google.protobuf.MessageOptions { 159 bool bool_opt = 7706090; 160 int32 int32_opt = 7705709; 161 int64 int64_opt = 7705542; 162 uint32 uint32_opt = 7704880; 163 uint64 uint64_opt = 7702367; 164 sint32 sint32_opt = 7701568; 165 sint64 sint64_opt = 7700863; 166 fixed32 fixed32_opt = 7700307; 167 fixed64 fixed64_opt = 7700194; 168 sfixed32 sfixed32_opt = 7698645; 169 sfixed64 sfixed64_opt = 7685475; 170 float float_opt = 7675390; 171 double double_opt = 7673293; 172 string string_opt = 7673285; 173 bytes bytes_opt = 7673238; 174 DummyMessageContainingEnum.TestEnumType enum_opt = 7673233; 175 DummyMessageInvalidAsOptionType message_type_opt = 7665967; 176} 177 178message CustomOptionMinIntegerValues { 179 option (bool_opt) = false; 180 option (int32_opt) = -0x80000000; 181 option (int64_opt) = -0x8000000000000000; 182 option (uint32_opt) = 0; 183 option (uint64_opt) = 0; 184 option (sint32_opt) = -0x80000000; 185 option (sint64_opt) = -0x8000000000000000; 186 option (fixed32_opt) = 0; 187 option (fixed64_opt) = 0; 188 option (sfixed32_opt) = -0x80000000; 189 option (sfixed64_opt) = -0x8000000000000000; 190} 191 192message CustomOptionMaxIntegerValues { 193 option (bool_opt) = true; 194 option (int32_opt) = 0x7FFFFFFF; 195 option (int64_opt) = 0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF; 196 option (uint32_opt) = 0xFFFFFFFF; 197 option (uint64_opt) = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF; 198 option (sint32_opt) = 0x7FFFFFFF; 199 option (sint64_opt) = 0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF; 200 option (fixed32_opt) = 0xFFFFFFFF; 201 option (fixed64_opt) = 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF; 202 option (sfixed32_opt) = 0x7FFFFFFF; 203 option (sfixed64_opt) = 0x7FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF; 204} 205 206message CustomOptionOtherValues { 207 option (int32_opt) = -100; // To test sign-extension. 208 option (float_opt) = 12.3456789; 209 option (double_opt) = 1.234567890123456789; 210 option (string_opt) = "Hello, \"World\""; 211 option (bytes_opt) = "Hello\0World"; 212 option (enum_opt) = TEST_OPTION_ENUM_TYPE2; 213} 214 215message SettingRealsFromPositiveInts { 216 option (float_opt) = 12; 217 option (double_opt) = 154; 218} 219 220message SettingRealsFromNegativeInts { 221 option (float_opt) = -12; 222 option (double_opt) = -154; 223} 224 225// Options of complex message types, themselves combined and extended in 226// various ways. 227 228message ComplexOptionType1 { 229 int32 foo = 1; 230 int32 foo2 = 2; 231 int32 foo3 = 3; 232 repeated int32 foo4 = 4; 233} 234 235message ComplexOptionType2 { 236 ComplexOptionType1 bar = 1; 237 int32 baz = 2; 238 239 message ComplexOptionType4 { 240 int32 waldo = 1; 241 242 extend google.protobuf.MessageOptions { 243 ComplexOptionType4 complex_opt4 = 7633546; 244 } 245 } 246 247 ComplexOptionType4 fred = 3; 248 repeated ComplexOptionType4 barney = 4; 249} 250 251message ComplexOptionType3 { 252 int32 qux = 1; 253} 254 255extend google.protobuf.MessageOptions { 256 protobuf_unittest.ComplexOptionType1 complex_opt1 = 7646756; 257 ComplexOptionType2 complex_opt2 = 7636949; 258 ComplexOptionType3 complex_opt3 = 7636463; 259} 260 261// Note that we try various different ways of naming the same extension. 262message VariousComplexOptions { 263 option (.protobuf_unittest.complex_opt1).foo = 42; 264 option (protobuf_unittest.complex_opt1).foo4 = 99; 265 option (protobuf_unittest.complex_opt1).foo4 = 88; 266 option (complex_opt2).baz = 987; 267 option (complex_opt2).bar.foo = 743; 268 option (ComplexOptionType2.ComplexOptionType4.complex_opt4).waldo = 1971; 269 option (complex_opt2).fred.waldo = 321; 270 option (complex_opt2).barney = { waldo: 101 }; 271 option (complex_opt2).barney = { waldo: 212 }; 272 option (protobuf_unittest.complex_opt3).qux = 9; 273} 274 275// ------------------------------------------------------ 276// Definitions for testing aggregate option parsing. 277// See descriptor_unittest.cc. 278 279// A helper type used to test aggregate option parsing 280message Aggregate { 281 int32 i = 1; 282 string s = 2; 283 284 // A nested object 285 Aggregate sub = 3; 286} 287 288// Allow Aggregate to be used as an option at all possible locations 289// in the .proto grammer. 290extend google.protobuf.FileOptions { Aggregate fileopt = 15478479; } 291extend google.protobuf.MessageOptions { Aggregate msgopt = 15480088; } 292extend google.protobuf.FieldOptions { Aggregate fieldopt = 15481374; } 293extend google.protobuf.EnumOptions { Aggregate enumopt = 15483218; } 294extend google.protobuf.EnumValueOptions { Aggregate enumvalopt = 15486921; } 295extend google.protobuf.ServiceOptions { Aggregate serviceopt = 15497145; } 296extend google.protobuf.MethodOptions { Aggregate methodopt = 15512713; } 297 298// Try using AggregateOption at different points in the proto grammar 299option (fileopt) = { 300 s: 'FileAnnotation' 301 // Also test the handling of comments 302 /* of both types */ i: 100 303 304 sub { s: 'NestedFileAnnotation' } 305}; 306 307message AggregateMessage { 308 option (msgopt) = { i:101 s:'MessageAnnotation' }; 309 int32 fieldname = 1 [(fieldopt) = { s:'FieldAnnotation' }]; 310} 311 312service AggregateService { 313 option (serviceopt) = { s:'ServiceAnnotation' }; 314 rpc Method (AggregateMessage) returns (AggregateMessage) { 315 option (methodopt) = { s:'MethodAnnotation' }; 316 } 317} 318 319enum AggregateEnum { 320 option (enumopt) = { s:'EnumAnnotation' }; 321 UNSPECIFIED = 0; 322 VALUE = 1 [(enumvalopt) = { s:'EnumValueAnnotation' }]; 323} 324 325// Test custom options for nested type. 326message NestedOptionType { 327 message NestedMessage { 328 option (message_opt1) = 1001; 329 int32 nested_field = 1 [(field_opt1) = 1002]; 330 } 331 enum NestedEnum { 332 UNSPECIFIED = 0; 333 option (enum_opt1) = 1003; 334 NESTED_ENUM_VALUE = 1 [(enum_value_opt1) = 1004]; 335 } 336} 337