|
Boost : |
From: Marcin Kalicinski (kalita_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-20 09:14:44
> The major use I thought of is a scene graph. This typically consists of a
> large number of nodes ( Can be many Mb file) many containing structures of
> points and transforms. I suspect its cheaper to keep these in memory in
> their
> binary format rather than as strings.
What you need to store a scene graph is a generic tree container, not ptree.
Property tree is for storing properties. Anyway, if you want you can
consider customizing data type to be some sort of Object *, but I don't know
if this is going to take you very far.
> Whatever... it would be interesting to see the rationale behind the
> design
> decisions made within the documentation. I *think* that a trade off has
> been
> made in favour of convenience and 'light weight' (I think it would not
> perform
> well on large files for example)
Yes, being light-weight and easy to use it the main goal. I think this is
said in the introduction part of the docs.
>>>Is it necessary to make key a string. Could it not also be (say) an
>>>integer
>>>id?
Library would need some sort of path parsing policy. I think that the only
required function would be to separate head of the path from the tail (sort
of Lisp-like behaviour). This is quite an interesting proposition, I
consider it the most valuable addition to the library at the moment.
Thank you,
Marcin
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk