Re: [boost] [UUID] PODness Revisited

Subject: Re: [boost] [UUID] PODness Revisited
From: Vladimir Batov (batov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-12-24 22:13:22

> Unfortunately I think any nontrivial constructor at all makes a class a
> non-POD.  So you may have to accept the uninitialized state in order to
> interact well with MPI.  You might consider whether you need a low-level
> representation class as well as a higher-level wrapper with stronger
> invariants.

I am very unsure of that POD... and the "uninitialized state"... Yuk. Are we 
sure it is that need to "interact well with MPI"? I am reading about MPI I 
see that for "normal" classes it deploys Boost.Serialization. With that I 
think we can make uuid serialization pretty close (efficiency-wise) to 
no-serialization (if we use the binary archive and simply stuff out internal 
data buffer into the archive). And Boost.Serialization certainly has no that 
"uninitialized state ... to interact well" requirement. Even better, the 
load() side of Boost.Serialization is easily tailored for classes without 
the default constructor (Do it all the time. Love the library).

Best,
V.