[boost] Re: Re: Formal review of "Output Formatters" library begins today

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-21 04:48:48

John Torjo wrote:

>> 
>> 
>>>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 depends on the meaning of "can be serialized". If that means, "has the
method 'serialize'", then right, I suggest to use it. If that mean using
the serialization library (say, text_archive or xml_archive), then no. I'd
like to use outfmt without including all serializaton headers. I want to be
able to output all of my classes, and I don't want to include serialization
headers in all of my own headers.

- Volodya