From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-28 17:06:08
JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z wrote:
> For the record, not that I'm in love with the stricter
> const rules either, but I must confess that, when hit
> by them the first time, they actually uncovered a (potential)
> problem in my test code. So...
> I've been thinking about this issue, and my impression is
> that regular code won't be hit as much as one might think.
All will be fine in simple cases, where all you do is recursively serialize
members. To give a data point, in one of my recent projects one out of the
nine classes does not serialize its members directly. This is the
unversioned case. Once you add versioning, you almost always have to
serialize a temporary object to take care of the previous versions, but I'm
not sure whether this is an issue if one only supports versioned loading
(and not saving) with Boost.Serialization.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk