Re: [boost] How do folks test serialization code?

Subject: Re: [boost] How do folks test serialization code?
From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-05 13:30:12

>> How would you serialize from one format to a different one without
>> breaking it down into "portably small" chunks?
>
> Of course you have to define the 128 bit integer in terms
> of some other types.  But THOSE types should already be
> portably serializable.

Sure, but as I said, exactly what those types are, and how many of them 
there are, changes from one platform/compiler to another.

> another way to deal with this is to work a at a more primitive
> level.  By marking the 128 integer type as "primitive" and
> defining an output for output/input stream operarate -
> text archives should "just work".  Of course these
> operators will have to be implemented with portability
> in mind so the issue is moved to somewhere else.  But
> then one probably needs to define these operators in
> any case so for text archives serialization comes for
> free.

You mean rely on the usual streaming << >> operators?

For sure I could do that, but full string conversion is crazy expensive 
compared to the byte-by-byte scheme I have now.

> for binary and portable binary archives, one might
> need to specialize the serialization operators. For binary
> archives there's not much if anything to do.  For
> portable binary archives, one might have to make
> a minor specialization.  The portable binary archive
> includes code for handling endianness of arbitrarily
> long integer types. (note that portable binary archive
> isn't complete in anycase in that it doesn't handle
> floating point types - a good GSOC project if
> one wants one.)

I already specialize for binary archives and just write out the bytes.

> So you've got a couple of ways of addressing this.

Thanks, but now I've tested what I have (and verified that the archives are 
truly portable at least for 32 and 64 bit systems), I'll stick with what I 
have I think,

Cheers, John.