Re: [boost] [serialization docs] Ping?

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-22 16:43:47

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

> In order of frequence of usage, I see the documents as being used
> to describe how to:
>
> a) make one's types serializable. ("Archive Concepts" and "Serializable 
> Concept")
>
> b) use archives which are included. ("Archive Models")
>
> c) make one's own archive implementation leveraging on the code included.
> ("Archive Concept" and "Archive Implementation")
>
> d) make one's own archive implementation from scratch.  No one has
> ever attempted this.  ("Archive Concept")

That's exactly right.

> I realize you don't buy this 

???

> and expect to see information which is
> included in "Archive Implementation" moved to "Archive Concepts".

Certainly not, unless "Archive Implementation" contains requirements
for archives. You haven't been very clear about whether it does or
not, but I think your last statement is that it doesn't.

> But in my view that muddles the whole functional organization which
> I was so careful to preserve above.  Its been this way since the
> beginning.
>
> What's changed is that the descriptions are couched
> in terms of "Concept" and "valid expressions" rather than function
> prototypes a before.  At this point part of the documentation
> uses one approach and other parts use the other and this is
> confusing.  

?? Concepts aren't supposed to be documented in the same way as
classes.  There's nothing confusing about that.

> That's why I would like to go back to were we started and just
> elmininate the terms "Concept" 

Terms?

> which imply a method 

Method?

> which hasn't been used in a consistent and correct way throughout
> the document.
>
> I've also come to believe that the notion of "Semantics" is
> quite subjective and needs to be thought through more.

Ugh.  

> So that is the basis of my suggestion for roling things back
> to the begining and just removing the word "Concept" as
> its use isn't really correct in that context.

Finally, and recently, it does seem correct, but the concepts are just
a little too weak to be useful.  It needs to give some semantic
guarantees.  Or, more accurately, you need an additional two-type
concept that associates loading and saving archives with one another.

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