Re: [boost] Re: Serialization Library Review

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-13 04:28:27

Robert Ramey wrote:
>>From: Alberto Barbati <abarbati_at_[hidden]>
>>Hi David,
> 
> 
>>1) I don't like the non-intrusive way of specifying the 
>>version/save/load operation.
> 
> 
> a non-intrusive method is required to implement serialization for classes that
> you don't want to change.  For example, the library includes serialization
> for all STL containers with without changing STL itself.  This would
> permit easy and optional addition of serialization to any class that
> might benefit from it

Alberto, if I understand him right, was objecting to use of "serialization"
class for implementing non-intrusive serialization, and was proposing
free functions for the same purpose. The fact that non-instrusive
serialization is needed in general is not disputed.

>>2) A most needed addition to the design is to provide a sort of 
> 
> "registry" object.....
> 
> This has been a hot topic.  It is really not possible to achieve the
> desired results.  I will add a section to th rationale explaining this
> in detail, 

Why wont't the scheme I describe in my recent email
(with topic "Serialization Submission version 6") work?

- Volodya