Subject: Re: [boost] Comparison of serialization results
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-12-31 11:03:11
on Fri Dec 30 2011, Brian Wood <woodbrian77-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> Dave Abrahams:
>> No post-hock marshalling? You should be able to add marshalling to a
>> class without modifying its declaration.
> If a class is popular enough, I often do. For example, the C++
> Middleware Writer (CMW) has support for the standard containers,
> std::complex, multi_index_container, stable_vector and others.
I mean a user should be able to do that.
>> No argument; I'm just sayin'.
> I don't have to go to any great lengths to find tests where
> the performance of executables that use Boost Serialization
> lags behind CMW based executables. I just think up a test
> and write it. The tests are quite basic.
>> That's a fundamentally intrusive design; being able to add serialization
>> non-intrusively was a major design goal for Boost.Serialization.
> I see.
> One thing I didn't mention yesterday is support for stream-
> based constructors:
> class Base
> template <typename R>
> explicit Base (ReceiveBufferFile<R>& buf);
> Does the Boost Serialization library have support for that?
I don't know.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk