From: Jeremy Maitin-Shepard (jbms_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-03-23 02:45:24
Jeff Garland <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
> Jeremy Maitin-Shepard wrote:
>> "Kasun Indrasiri" <kasun147_at_[hidden]> writes: >
>> Thus, it is not clear what advantage a JSON-format archive would offer.
>> The most obvious use for JSON is for communicating with a program
>> useful with the data, and therefore Boost Serialization is not the right
>> tool for the job.
> Programs written in C++ often need to inter communicate with programs written
> in other languages. Or they need to store data structures in a form that can
> be processed by programs written in another language. JSON is now a common
> format for doing this and has parsers any many languages. Last but not least,
> even if the program is all C++ some folks would prefer a recognizable and
> widely used format -- the serialization 'proprietary formats' don't qualify on
> that score.
There are already is the XML archive support, but that is still a
"Boost serialization proprietary format". Likewise, using JSON syntax
in place of XML would still result in a "Boost serialization proprietary
I'd certainly agree that JSON I/O facilities in C++ are useful, but I
don't think that then sticking Boost Serialization on top of those
facilities would be very useful.
-- Jeremy Maitin-Shepard
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk