Re: [boost] Comparison of serialization results

Subject: Re: [boost] Comparison of serialization results
From: Brian Wood (woodbrian77_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-12-30 14:25:14

 Dave Abrahams:
>
> No post-hock marshalling?  You should be able to add marshalling to a
> class without modifying its declaration.
>

If a class is popular enough, I often do.  For example, the C++
Middleware Writer (CMW) has support for the standard containers,
std::complex, multi_index_container,  stable_vector and others.

[...]

>
> No argument; I'm just sayin'.

I don't have to go to any great lengths to find tests where
the performance of executables that use Boost Serialization
lags behind CMW based executables.  I just think up a test
and write it.  The tests are quite basic.

>
> That's a fundamentally intrusive design; being able to add serialization
> non-intrusively was a major design goal for Boost.Serialization.

I see.

One thing I didn't mention yesterday is support for stream-
based constructors:

class Base
{
  template <typename R>
  explicit Base (ReceiveBufferFile<R>& buf);

  ...
};

Does the Boost Serialization library have support for that?

Cheers,
Brian Wood
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net