hermes-chatto-plugin/vendor/protobuf/wkt/_gen/field_mask_pb.py

# Copyright (c) 2025-2026 Buf Technologies, Inc.
#
# Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
# you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
# You may obtain a copy of the License at
#
#     http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
#
# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
# distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
# WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
# See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
# limitations under the License.

# Generated from google/protobuf/field_mask.proto. DO NOT EDIT.
# Generated by protoc-gen-py v0.1.1 with parameter "no_fmt_off".
# ruff: noqa: PGH004
# ruff: noqa

from __future__ import annotations

from typing import Literal, TYPE_CHECKING, TypeAlias

from protobuf import Message
from protobuf._codegen import file_desc

if TYPE_CHECKING:
    from protobuf import DescFile


_FieldMaskFields: TypeAlias = Literal["paths"]


class FieldMask(Message[_FieldMaskFields]):
    """
    `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, new values will
    be appended to the existing repeated field in the target resource. 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 new value will be merged into the existing sub-message
    in the target resource.

    For example, given the target message:

        f {
          b {
            d: 1
            x: 2
          }
          c: [1]
        }

    And an update message:

        f {
          b {
            d: 10
          }
          c: [2]
        }

    then if the field mask is:

     paths: ["f.b", "f.c"]

    then the result will be:

        f {
          b {
            d: 10
            x: 2
          }
          c: [1, 2]
        }

    An implementation may provide options to override this default behavior for
    repeated and message fields.

    Note that libraries which implement FieldMask resolution have various
    different behaviors in the face of empty masks or the special "*" mask.
    When implementing a service you should confirm these cases have the
    appropriate behavior in the underlying FieldMask library that you desire,
    and you may need to special case those cases in your application code if
    the underlying field mask library behavior differs from your intended
    service semantics.

    Update methods implementing https://google.aip.dev/134
    - MUST support the special value * meaning "full replace"
    - MUST treat an omitted field mask as "replace fields which are present".

    Other methods implementing https://google.aip.dev/157
    - SHOULD support the special value "*" to mean "get all".
    - MUST treat an omitted field mask to mean "get all", unless otherwise
    documented.

    ## 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.

    ## Field Mask Verification

    The implementation of any API method which has a FieldMask type field in the
    request should verify the included field paths, and return an
    `INVALID_ARGUMENT` error if any path is unmappable.

    ```proto
    message google.protobuf.FieldMask
    ```

    Attributes:
        paths:
            The set of field mask paths.

            ```proto
            repeated string paths = 1;
            ```
    """

    __slots__ = ("paths",)

    if TYPE_CHECKING:

        def __init__(self, *, paths: list[str] | None = None) -> None:
            pass

        paths: list[str]


_DESC = file_desc(
    b'\n google/protobuf/field_mask.proto\x12\x0fgoogle.protobuf"!\n\tFieldMask\x12\x14\n\x05paths\x18\x01 \x03(\tR\x05pathsB\x85\x01\n\x13com.google.protobufB\x0eFieldMaskProtoP\x01Z2google.golang.org/protobuf/types/known/fieldmaskpb\xf8\x01\x01\xa2\x02\x03GPB\xaa\x02\x1eGoogle.Protobuf.WellKnownTypesb\x06proto3',
    [],
    {"FieldMask": FieldMask},
)


def desc() -> DescFile:
    """Returns the descriptor for the file `google/protobuf/field_mask.proto`."""
    return _DESC