From: John Torjo (john.lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-21 05:23:04
>>My real observation is that I see this as orthogonal to serialization and
>>that it should remain that way. I don't seen any real overlap now except
>>that there might be a couple of instances where either one might do. I
>>think even these would be rare cases. I would resist any idea to
>>intertwine these concepts.
> I'm lost. What are "these concepts"? What I propose is that the "serialize"
> method be usable by the outfmt library to generate more usable output. No
> other link between the two libraries is suggested.
I assume you suggest something like:
- if an object can be serialized, use that for output
- if not, use default (operator<<)
This seems ok to me. Reece?
-- John Torjo -- john_at_[hidden] Contributing editor, C/C++ Users Journal -- "Win32 GUI Generics" -- generics & GUI do mix, after all -- http://www.torjo.com/win32gui/ -- v1.4.0 - save_dlg - true binding of your data to UI controls! + easily add validation rules (win32gui/examples/smart_dlg)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk