Re: [Boost-users] [serialization-1.32.0] de-serializing newer versions that the application can deal with

From: Bill Lear (rael_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-16 08:05:56

On Friday, June 16, 2006 at 08:45:27 (+0100) Russell Hind writes:
>Bill Lear wrote:
>> 
>> Versioning is per-class, and so why would you increment the version if
>> you did not introduce forward-incompatible changes?  It seems that you
>> only increment the version if you add/remove data members, reorder
>> them, or whatever.  I don't really see a practical downside to having
>> the library automatically puke if you are using old code to read a
>> newer version of a class.
>> 
>
>I don't expect the old version to read it successfully.  The 'puke' as 
>you put it at the moment is an access violation.  Which basically may 
>have left the process in an unstable state.  I want it to 'puke' but 
>with an exception that can be caught and handled gracefully.  Not an 
>access violation which basically means its anyones guess as to whether 
>the software can run successfully.  Read my original post on the matter 
>again.

I understood your original post and by "puke" I obviously meant throw
an exception --- what else did you expect?  A silent exit?  Core dump?

Bill