|
Boost : |
Subject: Re: [boost] [explore] Library Proposal: Container Streaming
From: David Bergman (David.Bergman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-01 13:09:28
On Dec 1, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> Robert Ramey wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>> Robert Ramey
>>>>
>>>> It didn't require learning to use Boost.Serialization.
>>>
>>> Here is what you're example looks like with boost serialization
>>>
>>> #include <iostream>
>>> #include <boost/serialization/vector.hpp>
>>> #include <boost/serialization/map.hpp>
>>> #include <boost/serialization/list.hpp>
>>> #include <boost/serialization/string.hpp>
>>> //#include <boost/date_time.hpp>
>>> #include <boost/archive/text_oarchive.hpp>
>>> int main(int argc, char * argv[]){
>>> boost::archive::text_oarchive output_log(std::cout);
>>> // simple vector example
>>> std::vector<int> vi;
>>> vi.push_back(1);
>>> vi.push_back(2);
>>> vi.push_back(3);
>>> output_log << vi;
>>
>> While this is possible, with a custom archive class, I hope you'll
>> agree that it will be rather heavyweight solution,
>
> Hmmm - I realize that the serialization library has a lot of template
> code. But to me the issue is conceptual "heaviness".
The only line that might look heavy to anyone is
boost::archive::text_oarchive output_log(std::cout);
So, perhaps Vladimir should create an alias
typedef boost::archive::text_oarchive arch;
and then:
arch(std::cout) << v; // v is a standard vector
for a simple one-shot archive...
I cannot see anything heavy at all, but that might be a disease related to having spent 23 years with C++ and having implemented CFront alternatives in the old days :-(
Perhaps even using a simple wrapper function would make Vladimir less stressed?
template<typename Cont>
std::ostream& output(Cont const& cont, std::ostream & stream = std::cout) {
boost::archive::text_oarchive(stream) << cont;
return stream;
}
and then use
output(v);
or
output(v, std::cerr);
> In both libraries, the idea is to wrap extra information about types
> so that they can easily be displayed on a stream. In either library
> you just write
>
> #include ...
> ...
>
> output_stream << data
>
> I just don't see the value in re-inventing of a whole new wheel.
Vladimir's claim is that his solution is lighter in two aspects (I think):
1. Easier to use
2. Not dependent on Boost
I hope we all realize that, no, #1 is not the case, and if so, one can create a simple wrapper as the one above to make it easier. So, what about #2? Well, as a proposed Boost library, it is no longer that important.
> By the time such a library would pass the
> boost review process, I'm sure it would be just as heavy
> weight (or more) than boost serialization.
> One would have a whole new interface to to something that
> is less capable.
>
> Already the serialization library has an xml_archive as well
> as text archive.
>
>> while a simple
>> output of output of std::vector can be implement in a 3-line template
>> function.
>
> I didn't have to write even one line to template code to
> implement the example.
This is a point of confusion for Vladimir, and I will comment on it in a more recent post.
/David
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk