[boost] Re: Re: Re: Serialization and async messaging

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-29 22:02:45

Scott Woods wrote:
>> transmitting program
>> ==============
>> serialize to a string.  we now have its total length.
>> transmit a string using what ever method syncronous/asyncronous
>> whatever.
>>
>> recieving program
>> ============
>> retrieve a string - using what ever method async, sync or whatever.
>> when a complete string is retrieved/reassembled or whatever
>> de-serialize to the original structure.
>>
>> Honestly, I can't see any thing about this that is less than optimal.
>>
>
> Aha. After Gennadiy's version of this I can now see it for what it is.
>
> Yes, the simple response is that this will work. A pedantic response
> is that it feels like duplication; why implement another layer (the
> envelopes) just to detect completion of objects, ignoring the
> potential in the existing serialization format (e.g. XML). A more
> useful response would point out the higher memory requirements,
> two scanning phases and increased incidence of copying.
>

If you're really a gluton for punishment consider the following:

make you sockets/tcp/whatever implementation with a i/ostream interface.
E.G.
class socket_istream ...

Transmit
======
{
//opens a socket_ostream
socket_osteram os(???);
// all current archive classes use a basic stream interface. so
{
xml_oarchive oa(os);
// start serializing
oa << ...
...
// stop serializing !
}
}

Recieve
=====
{
//open and input socket stream
socket_istream is(???);
// all current archves classes use basic stream interface - so
{
xml_iarchive ia(is)
ia >> ...
...
// done
}
}

Let us know when you've got this working.

Good Luck

Robert Ramey