Boost logo

Boost :

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-05 11:14:07


> So, I had no other choice but to implement serialization
> support for Boost.MultiIndex in an interface intrusive way.
> The morale of the story is: for rich-state classes where the
> exact state of an object depends heavily on its past history,
> non-intrusive serialization can be either algorithmically
> unfeasible (it is hard or impossible to reconstruct the
> history from the current state) or potentially less efficient
> than a interface intrusive approach. This does not mean that
> the class interface or the serialization support implementation
> are "broken".

Thx for explaining this. I'd like to go back the the header inclusion
dependency issue. The need for internal access isn't a reason why the
serialization headers need to be 'included by default'. A friend
class/function in separate serialization header could implement the
serialization using the internal mechanisms that are otherwise an
implementation detail.


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