From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-14 04:26:44
Jim Hyslop wrote:
> I've been looking at the serialization library (nice work, Robert) and I
> have a question. I searched the archives and didn't see any discussion
> on this, and I'm sorry I missed all the pre-approval discussion, or I
> would have said something sooner.
> What is the rationale behind using 'operator &()' to mean 'serialize
> this item?'
> I find a statement like 'ar & member1;' to be very non-intuitive: how
> does bitwise-and relate to serialization?
> It seems to me that most sensible code guidelines admonish against this
> kind of operator abuse (pardon my bluntness, but that's what it is when
> you get down to it).
What other operator would you suggest?
- "<<" is not good because the library can not just save,
but also load data
- ">>" is not good for the same reason
is very inconvenient.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk