Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-25 14:03:45

Ian McCulloch <ianmcc_at_[hidden]> writes:

> As I understand it (someone please correct me if I got this wrong), the core
> idea of the new proposal (from
> and followups) is
> to provide a single point of customization, that *serialization function
> authors* can utilize to serialize an array in one call. Of course making
> use of this hook is optional, but since it is also a good convenience
> function (it saves a couple of lines by avoiding having to manually code a
> loop), there isn't really any point to not use it.

Ian, I know you're trying to help, but please don't jump ahead to that
conclusion. I would prefer that either

  a) Robert comes to that conclusion on his own


  b) He understands and accepts the consequences (which I have not yet
     described) of not drawing that conclusion.

I am trying to very carefully build understanding of those
consequences and making the assertion yourself is not going convince

> Note that a significant point of the proposal
> is that the
> possibility exists that this 'hook' is not part of the serialization
> library proper, but the point is *it must be globally accessible*
> and not specific to a particular archive.

There's really no need to make that point. Robert just needs to
understand what he's getting into if he decides not to accept that,
and the *technical* reasons for those consequences. So please, let's
not push that conclusion on him. He's free to agree or disagree, as
he pleases.

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at