Re: [boost] [serialization] No Reply?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-12 20:29:10

"Robert Ramey" <ramey_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>>  Overload serialize in the namespace of your class.
>>
>> Then write another, possibly uglier, recommendation that works on all
>> supported compilers.  If you have to use macros, that's fine.  E.g.,
>>
>>
>>  // somewhere in the serialization library
>>  #if BOOST_NO_ARGUMENT_DEPENDENT_LOOKUP
>>  # define BOOST_SERIALIZE(namespace) serialize
>>  #else
>>  # define BOOST_SERIALIZE(namespace) namespace::serialize
>>  #endif
>>
>>  // user code
>>  namespace my { namespace ns
>>  {
>>    class my_class { ... };
>>
>>    template <class A>
>>    void serialize(A&, my_class); // declaration (unused in non-ADL
>>  case) }}
>>
>>  // definition
>>  template <class Archive>
>>  void BOOST_SERIALIZE(my::ns)(Archive& ar, ny::ns::my_class& x)
>>  {
>>     ...
>>  }
>
> That sounds like what I did for version 1.32.   

Is it equivalent to what you did, or does it just sound reminiscent?

> I considered a very ugly hack.  
              ^
              "it?"

> I don't think I was the only person that felt this way.  I resolved
> to fix it in the next version - and here we are. oh well.

Surely you don't think the recommendation I'm suggesting for
conforming compilers is an ugly hack?

IMO it doesn't matter much how ugly the portable-to-broken-compilers
workaround is, as long as it's legit for the conforming ones and
doesn't induce maintenance problems.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com