From: jarvi (jarvi_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-19 16:15:18
On Sep 19, 2005, at 3:33 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> I like the look of this - though I'm not really familiar enough with
> boost::tuple to have a strong opinion. I also liked the test. Has
> been tested with msvc 6.5? This platform gave me a lot of headaches
> serialization of boost::variant but I went through to maintain the
> idea that
> serialization is supported on that platform.
> Better yet, which platforms has this been tested on?
> Does the author of Boost.Tupple have anything to say about this?
The implementation relies on the cons-list implementation of tuples.
It is part of the public interface of Boost.Tuple, but not part of the
So if one wants to define serialization so that it works with any TR1
tuple implementation, one must build the metafunctions around the
The downside of this is, that more compiler resources will be used.
Also, at some point we'll roll in "Fusion" that will largely replace
the current code of
Boost.Tuple. Then we'll have more powerful means to iterate over
tuples, in the style
of MPL. But for now, my suggestion would be to consider implement
TR1 compatible facilities. Or be prepared to change the implementation
is included into boost.
> Some attention should be paid to serialization traits. Should this be
> tracked, untracked, or the default. Also should it be versioned. it
> is now
> by default which is probably a good choice. Its not that I have any
> specific ideas regarding this, its just that I think that the defaults
> should be considered explictly as to their appropriate ness.
> Robert Ramey
> troy d. straszheim wrote:
>> Serialization of tuple. This will come in handy when revamping
>> serialization tests...
>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk