Re:[boost] Re:Re: Output formatters: different approaches

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-01 15:55:32

http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg71956.php

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 10:54:02 +0400
From: Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]>
Subject: 
Vladimir Prus wrote:

>Robert, can I first of all ask you to use a mailer, or a news reader, which
>preserves threading? Recently experiments have shown that Mozilla
>Thunderbird, for example, works fine both with emails and with NTTP
>gateway, and it's free. You can also try some other clients, but please do
>something about the issue.

Hmmm - I've been trying to configure my MS Outlook to do this and its
driving me crazy.

>>> The idea of the library, as I see it, is to provide object
>>> serialization,
> but
>>> - without the overhead serialization library has
>>> - with extra layout tweaks
> 
>>Yes, it would be nice.
> 
> For objects of the type being discussed, (i.e. no pointers, no class
> versioning, no memory tracking of duplicates, etc) the serialization
> library has no extra runtime overhead.

>Basically, I want every call I define to have a 'dump'
>method which can be called from debugger. So, I need output facilities
>available in every translation unit.

>> If function output formatters is helpful for making output more easily
>> presentable, fine. Though G. Rozenthal's, experiment makes me doubt this.

>Which experiment?

I was referring to Rozenthals post:
http://lists.boost.org/MailArchives/boost/msg71956.php

[On the other hand, if output formatters is to be an alternative
implementation of the functionality in the serialization library ]
>> I believe the demos and documentation in the serialization package show
>> that it to be much, much easier to use than the proposed library for this
>> purpose.

>Robert, while I agree that serialization is immensely useful, the point you
>make above is a bit skewed. Which example in the serialization library
>shows how to change start/end delimiter of a vector?

That's what the xml_archive does for name-value pairs.  The same method
could be used for any user defined types.

Robert Ramey