About protobuf-csharp-port specific option extensions about protobuf-csharp-port HOT 3 CLOSED

Can't say I've used that syntax before - it's not clear to me what it's doing, 
as that doesn't appear to be applying the option to the *field* (which it's 
doing in the first one). However, we don't do any parsing ourselves - we just 
delegate to protoc. So if it works in protoc, that should be fine for 
protobuf-csharp-port too.

I admit I still don't really grok what's going on here, but fortunately I have 
collaborators who do :) Explanation from Roger:

The language guide for protobuffers has some information on this:

http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/proto.html#options

Specifically it states: "Note that if you want to use a custom option in a 
package other than the one in which it was defined, you must prefix the option 
name with the package name, just as you would for type names."

This is the reason that you see the qualifier "google.protobuf.".  The reason 
for the "csharp_field_options" is that the option itself is a message not a 
field.  So the syntax you wrote works when you are accessing a field extension 
of message from the same package:

extend google.protobuf.MessageOptions { 
    optional int32 msg_type = 50001; 
}
message Msg {
    option (msg_type) = 11;
    required string name = 1;
    required string pswd = 2;
}

-----

I'm closing this as WontFix as I can't see that it's anything that this code 
base could change either way.

yes, i can use it with the type before.
Thanks a lot.