From: Thorsten Ottosen (thorsten.ottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-21 09:08:23
Jorge Lodos wrote:
> What I think PT must have that serialization library is not meant to is:
> 1. The ability to load/save properties independently, not as a whole.
> 2. A documented (for library extensibility) parser interface allowing parser
> developers to accomplish (1).
> At least 3 storages requiring (1) come to mind: windows registry, ISA Server
> storage and IIS metabase.
> I would put these requisites as conditions for acceptance.
I think it is quite hard to require that a parser for
config file X must exists for us to accept the library. It puts a great
deal of burden on the library author. Our focus should be on
the general core interface of the library s.t. we get a flexible
solution that can be useful in many areas.
Then if the author agrees to it, we can look at new parsers.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk