From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-14 11:13:41
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 08:13:05 -0700, Robert Ramey wrote
> Jeff Garland wrote:
> >Of course there are many great new features that I had to try out and that ran
> >me into a couple issues with the xml output. The first is that I can't seem
> >to output a std::string name value pair:
> As described in the "Release Notes" of the documentation, XML
> archives don't work with gcc 3.2 due to a bug in that version of
> gcc. I'm now working on draft # 12 and its possible that this
> problem may be worked around. It doesn't appear in gcc 3.3
Ah, thanks I didn't catch that....
> > I notice that trying this with strings results in a compilation error. I
> > assume the intent is to make all types fail to compile with archives that
> > name value pairs?
> You assumption is correct. It is my intention that the xml archive
> trap at compile time any attempt to serialize anything not wrapped
> as a name-value pair. I'll look into this.
BTW, I look forward to a description of the requirements for the creation of
new archives. I believe the new design very nicely supports user written
archives and in my experience this becomes a very important capability (your
requirement #8). As an example, on a recent project we had to write an
'archive' (we split archives and call them 'Reader' and 'Writer' classes)
because we needed to support certain binary byte orderings for sending /
receiving messages. We use this type of archive on the boundary of the system
and then used o/istream-based archives for communications within the system.
All the while, the message objects are oblivious to these different formats.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk