Re: [boost] [Serialization] why operator &()?

From: Jim Hyslop (jhyslop_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-14 06:54:52

Russell Hind <rh_gmane <at> mac.com> writes:
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
> >  - Writing
> > 
> >         a.serialize(member1).serialize(member2)
> > 
> >    is very inconvenient.
> 
> I agree.  It may not be the most obvious but it allows a single 
> serialize function rather than explicit save/load functions or chained 
> calls as you've shown above.

So who says they have to be chained? I agree the chained calls above look rather
ugly, but what's wrong with:

  a.serialize(member1);
  a.serialize(member2);

Clear, concise, and consistent.

-- 
Jim