Re: [Boost-users] [Serialization] purpose of GUID

From: Ingo Nolden (nuttygraphics_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-19 15:07:00

At 05:43 17.05.2007, you wrote:
>
>"Ingo Nolden" <<mailto:nuttygraphics_at_[hidden]>nuttygraphics_at_[hidden]> 
>wrote in message 
><news:20070516202821.34C172F83E5_at_[hidden]>news:20070516202821.34C172F83E5_at_wowbagger.osl.iu.edu...
>
>Thank you for your answer,
>
>
>I understand now. I saw the code, that would use the name. But I 
>couldn't see why it was not invoked.
>My actual intent is to use boost::serialization in a very special 
>way. I am going to write a xml_archive replacement, that will enable 
>me to read nearly arbitrary xml.
>
>*** my personal view is that this is not possible.  Boost 
>serialization archives
>are intimately coupled to the C++ data structures they correspond to.

Yes, but I though if I write an own archive class that should somehow 
be possible. It seems it will not be really easy though.

>
>My first plan was to write an own serialization. After looking into 
>boost::serialization I thought it wouldn't be clever to not use as 
>much of this great code as possible. I especially appreciate that 
>the serialize function does not need to be virtual, and therefore 
>can accept a non polymorphic archive. It seems there is a great 
>level of savvy gone into that part.
>
>*** There are tools which take an arbitrary XML schema and produce a 
>corresponding
>C++ data structure.  This is the opposite of Boost Serialization.

I just downloaded CodeSynthesis, and I will give it a try. Perhaps it 
is a good solution for the meanwhile.

>
>If you're looking for a project, you could make a 
>version/derivative/add-on to the xml_oarchive
>which produces and xml schema along with the archive itself.  Then 
>the archive would be
>browsable with standard xml tools.  I considered this idea when 
>making the xml_archive
>but concluded it wasn't necessary to meet the minimal requirements 
>for acceptance.

The advantage, of using a general serialization library is, that it 
will output binary and any other kind of data as well. That makes it 
a no 1 choice. Also, the generation of an xml-schema would be nice. 
On the other hand, if the schema can be used to generate classes for 
boost::serialization, that would be even better...

By the way. Is there a place where people share *archive 
implementations for boost::serialization ?

Thanks for your help so far. It takes me a good step ahead.

Ingo

>
>Robert Ramey
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Boost-users mailing list
>Boost-users_at_[hidden]
>http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users