|
Boost : |
From: Gennadiy Rozental (gennadiy.rozental_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-04 03:27:36
> When comparing your code and the proposed library, I have two points.
>
> First, the proposed one has a lot of code to detect what kind of object is
> output, for getting its elements, and so on. This adds a lot of complexity
> and should be avoided -- by using serialization library to do the task.
Ok. But I am not sure serialization library as it is now could be used for
this purpose.
> Your implementation is indeed simple. But: it contains code which
iterators
> over elements of a vector. Should I define my_cool_vector, I'd have to
> define an overload that your code can use. I'd prefer to defining only
> overload for serialization library, and have the output library use that
> automatically.
Actually it's not exactly true. If you notice in a comment before
void decorate_elements( std::ostream& ostr, std::vector<T> const& c,
Decorator const& d )
I mention that it's actually supposed to be generic version that used for
any class that match Collection concept, something like:
enable_if<is_collection<T> >
void decorate_elements( std::ostream& ostr, T const& c, Decorator const& d )
> Another point about your implementation is that it does not distinguish
> between sequences/maps -- which might be desirable.
If you do want to distinguish you could do this with overloading like this
enable_if<is_assoc_collection<T> >
void decorate_elements( std::ostream& ostr, T const& c, Decorator const& d )
though I do not see an immediate need for this
> > Would you want something
> > like string format ("% | %") it could be easily added, though I question
> > its usability. It assumes a lot of things when applied to multivalue
> > container. As for reflection framework, I would be interested in generic
> > solution, but again not in a context of output formatting specifically
(I
> > may use it for this purpose, but not design it for this purpose).
>
> What I'm proposing is that output library use the *existing* mechanism,
> provided by the serialization library.
I supposed you want to reuse namely reflection abilities of it. I am not
quite sure existing mechanisms will allow you to supply convenient
interfaces for most basic (but mostly used) cased.
> - Volodya
Gennadiy.
P.S. I did not have a chance yet to look on latest serialization library
implementation, but here:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/78978
is my post dated somewhere in between two reviews, that describe traversing
framework that could be used by serialization lib implementation and by ant
other reflection need. I hope serialization library provide something like
that. In this case We may use it for generic output formatting.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk