[boost] Re: [multi_index] announce: serialization support

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-01 12:36:59

"Joaquín Mª López Muñoz" <joaquin_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:41ADE6BA.7E4EEAF4_at_tid.es...
> Hi, I've just uploaded an upgrade of Boost.MultiIndex that provides
serialization support at:

> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/boost/files/multi_index_120104.zip

> Docs are not yet fully upgraded, but there's some material
> on serialization support on the advanced topics page, plus
> a test case.
> I'd be grateful if those interested in Boost.MultiIndex can
> give this a try, and report about problems, missing features,
> improvements, etc. The implementation is a little complex, so
> some source code reviewing would be appreciated.

I did peruse the source code some.  Here are some random observations.

First of all on the multi-index package:

a) I was surprised at how much was involved in realizing what seems to me
such a simple idea.  The fact I'm surprised at this is actually no surprise,
as I'm almost always surprised at how much work it is to actually finish
anything.

b) This is an incredibly professional job - a very high standard.  This
documentation makes a great contribution to this impression.

c) I believe that this is the reason the very ambitious undertaking "sailed
thtough" the boost review process - (unlike most others).  Aspiring library
authors should study this as an example.

Re the serialization aspect.

I have to say I was a little disapointed that the implemention of
serialization wasn't more transparent.  I really couldn't follow the line
from the serialization interface to the implementation in the time I was
willing to spend.  So I don't feel I can verify the implementation other
than by testing.  This always makes me feel sligthly uncomfortable.  This
isn't really a criticism and I'm not suggesting any changes.  Only in
reviewing the code did I become aware for the first time how much is
required, so maybe it can be no other way.

I'm a little disappointed at how much effort was required to implement
serialization for this container.  My hopes were that implemention of
serialization for any class would be easier.  Of course this is not a
typical case so its not a huge thing.  I'm curious if any of the complexity
was a result of some requirement of the serialization package itself.

I didn't spend a lot of time on this, so feel free to take any of the above
with a grain of salt.

Robert Ramey