Fixes extra whitespace on generated comments. (#1950)

Fixes extra whitespace on generated comments.

1 files changed, 48 insertions, 48 deletions

diff --git a/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h b/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h
index 175db600..491463f9 100644
--- a/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h
+++ b/objectivec/google/protobuf/FieldMask.pbobjc.h
@@ -49,25 +49,25 @@ typedef GPB_ENUM(GPBFieldMask_FieldNumber) {
 
 /**
  * `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 {
@@ -77,26 +77,26 @@ typedef GPB_ENUM(GPBFieldMask_FieldNumber) {
  *       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
@@ -106,25 +106,25 @@ typedef GPB_ENUM(GPBFieldMask_FieldNumber) {
  * 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 field
  * mask.
- * 
+ *
  * 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
@@ -132,34 +132,34 @@ typedef GPB_ENUM(GPBFieldMask_FieldNumber) {
  *       }
  *       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
@@ -167,13 +167,13 @@ typedef GPB_ENUM(GPBFieldMask_FieldNumber) {
  *       }
  *       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
@@ -181,26 +181,26 @@ typedef GPB_ENUM(GPBFieldMask_FieldNumber) {
  * 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;
@@ -209,44 +209,44 @@ typedef GPB_ENUM(GPBFieldMask_FieldNumber) {
  *       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.
  **/