Re: [boost] [serialization] string serialization

Subject: Re: [boost] [serialization] string serialization
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-03 19:16:48

Nope,  It's not intentional.

I don't remember why it is the way it is.  Collections evolved
to become more efficient and in the process collection_size_type
came into being.  Since std::string was already primitive and had
a special implemention there hasn't been any motivation to mess
with it.  I'm not even that enthusiastic about colllection_size_type.
Turns out that each std collection has its own size_type.  So this
makes thing even more confusing.

It's the way it is because there was no obvious better choice.

Robert Ramey

Nikolay Mladenov wrote:
> How should I understand this?
>
> as "Nope, it should be fixed",
> or "Nope, deal with it"
>
> or is it simply "get lost"?
>
> This "simple" fact causes incompatibility problems between 64 and 32
> bit archives.
>
> Nikolay
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Robert Ramey <ramey_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Nope, it's just a fact.
>>
>> Robert Ramey
>>
>> Nikolay Mladenov wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I the basic_binary_iprimitive.ipp (and I suppose other files) the
>>> size of the strings is serialized as
>>> std::size_t and not as serialization::collection_size_type.
>>> Is that intentional?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Nikolay Mladenov
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
>>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Unsubscribe & other changes:
>> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost