Re: [boost] [serialization] Dealing with any tainted types.

Subject: Re: [boost] [serialization] Dealing with any tainted types.
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-14 18:17:49

David Sankel wrote:
> Thanks for your detailed response Robert...
>> <snip>
>> To really do this right, I see the following as necessary
>>
>> a) Clarify and simplify the current archive concept.  I've thought
>> about this alot and know what I want to do - but I'm not excited
>> enough to
>> do it.
>>
>
> I've been giving some thought to this. Not as much clarifying and
> simplifying, but more distilling the essence of the domain. I have a
> feeling that if we nail the essence down, all the compositionality
> will be there without having to tack it on as an afterthought.
>
> Here's what I have so far:
>
> concept Archive:
>  struct _ where
>  { typedef _ RState
>  ; typedef _ WState
>
>  ; template< typename T >
>    struct lookup
>    { typedef _ type  // This _ is either mpl::void_ or
>                      // std::pair< function< void (RState&, const T&)
>                      > //          , function< T (WState&) >
>                      //          >
>    ; type operator()() const;
>    }
>  };
>
>
> Something fits the archive concept if they fill in the blanks above.
> RState and WState are state information required for reading and
> writing. The lookup type function, passed type T, will either return
> mpl::void_ or a pair. If it returns void_ we know that T is not
> considered a primitively serializable type. If it returns the pair,
> we know it is a serializable type witnessed by the pair of write and
> read functions returned by operator().
>
> One key condition is that the primitive types for an Archive, if they
> are templates, must be *fully saturated*. Meaning that:
>
> template<>
> lookup< std::vector<bool> >
>
>
> is fine, but
>
> template<typename T>
> lookup< std::vector<T> >
>
>
> is not. This condition prevents recursive lookup calls with
> non-primitives. This, I think, is going to be the key to
> compositionality later. More to come...
>
> Does all of this make sense so far?

In all honesty, I didn't understand even one sentence of the above.

Robert Ramey