Re: [boost] [UUID] Code for UUIDs as PODs and other changes

Subject: Re: [boost] [UUID] Code for UUIDs as PODs and other changes
From: Scott McMurray (me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-12-06 14:40:29

On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 14:07, Roman Yakovenko <roman.yakovenko_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Scott McMurray <me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I remarked the other day that a UUID has a well-defined, portable
>> binary format, so I took a bit of time to rearrange things to make the
>> UUID class a POD and make more use of the generators idea.  Along the
>> way I made a few other changes.
>>
>> I've uploaded the result (with updated docs) to the vault as
>> uuid_alt_v13_pod.zip :
>> http://www.boostpro.com/vault/index.php?action=downloadfile&filename=uuid_alt_v13_pod.zip
>>
>> Some elaboration follows below.  Comments appreciated.
>
> Hi. Very nice implementation. I have few question:
>

Thanks, though most of the implementation credit still goes to Andy.

> 1. Why variant() and version() are member function of class uuid? I
> think they should be free functions.
>

Either way would work, obviously.  I thought of them as properties of
the UUID, rather than some computed thing, but that's an iffy
difference, so for normal encapsulation justifications it may better
to make them non-member.

> 2. May be it is better to introduce "native_generator" which is cross platform?
>

There is actually a typedef for that.  I figured that it would be
better to keep the implementations separate and conditionally compile
the typedef, rather than try to mix the 2 (or more, if other
platforms) implementations into one.

That said, strategies would also work nicely for that, and would allow
cross-platform specification of which UUID version you'd like, too...