Subject: Re: [boost] [explore] Library Proposal: Container Streaming
From: Jeremy Pack (rostovpack_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-12-01 13:21:51
Responding to two e-mails from David:
> > And that code still has
> > to be parsed by the compiler.
> This is a different issue. Is that your problem, that you think compilers
> have a problem with some complex constructs inside the Boost.Serialization
> library? Does the compiler fail? Consume too much resources? Too much time?
> 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.
I agree with Volodya here. In my environment at least, we would not be
willing to include all of the serialization headers just to be able to print
a vector to the screen. We'd write yet another custom vector printing
function instead (which we have). The reason is that we have very large
binaries, and if we included the serialization library into many of our
compilation units, it would have a non-trivial effect on compilation time.
C++ compile times are a concern to many of us, I think - hence the invention
of languages such as Go (without the exclamation point).
Besides, I like the Explore library as is (other than the name, sorry).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk