RE: Persistence Library Needed in Boost? (Was: [boost] A tip from the Dr.)

From: Stewart, Robert (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-24 08:18:58

> From:	jackthompson99 [SMTP:JMThompson_at_[hidden]]

[snip long description of persistence mechanism]

> So, I don't know if this is the best way to do it, but we do need 
> something simple that uses ONLY C++.  The parser could probably be 

Here is the first statement of your premise: A C++-only persistence
mechanism.  Provided that is accepted as a need, then your library may be
the solution.

> faster and smaller, but the concept is rock solid.

That's rather presumptuous of you, isn't it? ;-}

> What do you think?????

There are numerous C++-only persistence mechanisms.  For example, RogueWave
created one years ago, though I don't know how current it is, and it
certainly isn't open for standardization.  The question remains whether this
is a worthwhile goal.  There are object databases that are less intrusive
than your singly-rooted object hierarchy, and they are probably faster.  So
I have to ask, why reinvent the wheel?

How does your framework handle class templates?  How does your singly-rooted
design interact with other singly-rooted hierarchies?  Is your binary
representation portable?

Have you tested your framework on different platforms?  Is your technique
compiler specific?  Is it OS specific?  I'd guess you've implemented your
framework with MSVC on Windows of some flavor. There may be problems lurking
that will be showstoppers on other platforms.

I'm not trying to be negative, just realistic.  There may be great value in
your proposition.

Rob
Susquehanna International Group, LLP
http://www.sig.com