Re: [boost] [serialization] exception-safety of container-serialization

From: JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z (joaquin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-18 15:19:47

----- Mensaje original -----
De: bwood <brass_at_[hidden]>
Fecha: Sábado, Febrero 18, 2006 7:42 pm
Asunto: Re: [boost] [serialization] exception-safety	of
        container-serialization

> Joaquín M López Muñoz wrote:
> >I would NOT go for the strong guarantee for the following 
> two reasons: 
> 
> 
> >1. Given the basic guarantee, all-or-nothing semantics can 
> >be implemented externally, and as efficiently as you'd do it 
> >internally. 
> >2. It might be of interest to keep a partially recovered object. 
> >For instance, think of the situation in which a container is 
> being 
> >marshalled thru a socket and you lose internet conectivity. 
> 
> I started to reply to this and then wondered if I understood
> what you meant.  Were you talking about the container as the 
> "partially recovered object" or an object that will be stored
> by the container?

The former.

>  The subsequent discussion I guess points to 
> the latter.  I think the first case is interesting.  If a program 
> sends 100 objects and another receives 99 of them no problem, 
> it would probably be helpful to get that information back to 
> the sender so the whole thing isn't repeated.  Does Boost::
> serialization support this?   
> 

It does, at least for STL containers: if an error is
found during the process of loading elements into a container,
the container retains the elements succesfully loaded
so far.

Joaquín M López Muñoz
Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo 


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost