Re: [Boost-users] [serialization, boost::function] stateful function objects

From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-07 19:52:26

Hmmm ...

i have used non-intrusive serialization on a function object without 
problems.

So I don't see a problem here so I'm clearly missing something.

Robert Ramey

Ruediger Berlich wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I have a class that is being serialized in regular intervals. It
> contains a vector<shared_ptr<somefunctionObject> > . As the
> somefunctionObject objects can maintain state, I want to be able to
> serialize them along with the surrounding class. This works fine with
> the current design.
>
> I would find it much more pleasing to replace the above vector e.g.
> with a vector<boost::function<void(someType)> >. From the program
> logic this would have the same effect, but would be more elegant.
>
> I can not see, though, how serialization would work in this case. As
> far as I know it is not possible to retrieve the object back from
> boost::function. And it is also not possible to specify more than one
> interface to boost::function, e.g. in order to support two operator()
> with different signatures like this:
>
> "boost::function<void(someFunctionObkject), someFunctionObject(void)>
> f;"
>
> If that was possible, I could just give the function object a "clone"
> function and write my own (de-)serialization code.
>
> Any ideas ?
>
> Thanks and Best Regards,
> Ruediger Berlich