Re: [boost] [async] messages threads and networks

Subject: Re: [boost] [async] messages threads and networks
From: Scott Woods (scott_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-04-25 20:23:42

>> encoding? Given the example it would take a recompilation.
>
> nope.

Well "given the example" - it would.

You also make no mention of my related point that there is no
standard archive registry.

>
> string encoding;
>
> polymorphic_oarchve * poa;
> if( encoding = "Neat Bytes")
>    poa = boost::archive::polymorphic_text_oarchive oa(ss);
> else
>   poa = boost::archive::polymorphic_binary_oarchive oa(ss);
> ..
>    *poa << ....

Fair enough; but you have presented different code.

I made the same point about a Pact version of a similar operation. It was
never about whether users of Boost.Serialization could add the code you
have added. It was about the fact that there is no Boost.ArchiveFactory.

>
>
>> The last point is how Boost.Serialization handles UDTs/ADTs. My
>> understanding
>> of this area is sketchy - it appears to rely on pointers to methods
>> for archiving of
>> such objects.
>
> nope - uses templates with type parameters.

Apologies. But not sure that that finalizes anything.

>
>> Achieving the same mobility with Boost.Serialization is at the very
>> least difficult.
>
> Well, it would require a careful study of the documentation and
> understanding of how to use it.

OK. I recently spent about a month attempting to determine which
was the better approach to serialization, given a set of 5 different 
solutions.
The harder I looked the further I got from an answer.

At the important levels they are apples and oranges. When someone chooses
a serialization solution out of Protobuf, Boost.Serialization and s11n they
are choosing much more than a function that converts an application type
to a sequence of bytes. They are choosing a model of operation for the
related serialization activity.

My response to Sohail was an attempt at saying that Pact deliberately 
targets
runtime selection of encoding and the associated mobility of encoded data. 
This
is within the "model of operation" for Pact.- out of the box. If I am wrong
to suggest that Boost.Serialization had different design goals and 
consequently
does not deliver this (/out of the box/) then I am happy to retract.

Cheers,
Scott