RE: [boost] int vs int32_t [was: Serialiization Review ]

From: Dave Harris (brangdon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-04 15:26:36

In-Reply-To: <000e01c2970d$da9593c0$39001cac_at_ih1comp>
On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 18:42:06 -0000 Iain K.Hanson 
(iain.hanson_at_[hidden]) wrote:
> Two suggestions *I think* have been made. [...]
> 
> 2) That the serialisation library could detect the size of integral 
> types being serialised and use the correct int*_t types instead of
> short, int etc.

I don't see that it needs to do anything more than it is doing. The int*_t 
types are surely just typedefs for short, long etc, which are already 
supported. Only if the standard adds new fundamental types will the 
serialisation library need to be updated.

The trick is that something stored as (eg) a 32-bit int on one platform 
can be read back as (eg) a 32-bit long on another. As long as the local 
typedefs are OK everything should come out in the wash.

> Two suggestions *I think* have been made. [...]

I've made a third suggestion which I'll repeat here. The library should 
have a binary archive format which uses a variable-length byte-oriented 
format, in which the format of a number does not depend on the local 
hardware register size or endianness. This should be the recommended 
default format. It should have a suitable, short, snappy name.

-- Dave Harris