From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-27 06:12:53
Edward Diener <eddielee_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Edward Diener <eddielee_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
>>>>"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>>>| On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:32:22 +0200, Thorsten Ottosen wrote
>>>>| What about serialization -- it's a big library, but really
>>>>people are working on a proposal about reflection for C++0x which
>>>>would give automatic serialization; so we'd better wait with this.
>>> Having a reflection facility in C++ does not obviate the need for a
>>> serialization library. Furthermore since the reflection work is
>>> closed to those outside of the committee, AFAICS
>> What can you see that indicates the work is closed to those outside
>> the committee?
> 1) I asked Gabriel Dos Reis to participate in the work on reflection and
> was told that my input was not needed, but if they needed someone to
> test things out, I could volunteer. In effect I was told to get lost,
> evidently because I was not a member of the committee or was not
> considered smart enough or important enough to contribute.
I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from what Gaby says. He's just
one guy with a not-always-smooth email demeanor. Never forget that
the committee is made up of individuals, and that people working on
proposals are not necessarily tied to the committee in any particular
way. I would also not conclude from this that Gaby would welcome your
help if you were a committee member. In other words, "closed to those
outside the committee" is probably not the right conclusion. Those
working on the reflection project may still not be interested in your
input for whatever reasons, of course, but you might try knocking on a
few other doors.
> 2) Where is the information regarding reflection and the work being
> done on it published ?
I don't think any information is being published. This is not a
"committee project," at least not yet. This is some people working on
a project that they *may* eventually bring to the committee in the
form of a proposal, if they ever finish it ;-)
> If it is not closed to those outside the committee, then the ongoing
> work on it should be accessible to others, and others should be able
> to comment on it and contribute to it.
Not neccessarily. Who the people on that project decide to accept
contributions from is really up to them.
>>>I will be sorely disappointed if C++ does not have serialization in
>>>the next C++ standard, but perhaps the C++ committee is working on
>> You can pretty much tell what the committee is working on by
>> looking at the contents of the publicly available mailings. There
>> haven't been any serialization papers in any mailings I've seen.
>> If you want to avoid disappointment, I suggest you write and submit
>> a proposal.
> I was promoting the idea that the Boost Serialization library be
My suggestion applies perfectly. Why don't you propose it?
> If the Boost serialization library is not submitted, and the C++
> committee is not intending to have a serialization library, I think
> it will be a big mistake but I have no serialization library of my
> own to submit
Pete Becker proposed, essentially, the Boost.Threads design. It
doesn't have to be "your own."
> as I think the Boost one is better than anything I could do and
> better than anything else I have ever seen using standard C++. I
> will be glad to work with Mr. Ramey on the writing up a proposal
> part, since I am a fairly good writer, but it is obviously up to him
> and not me whether he wants to propose the library to the committee.
Not really. If you really want this to happen, *you* should commit
yourself to proposing it, and then invite Mr. Ramey to join you.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk