Re: [Boost-users] Sockets and structures?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Sockets and structures?
From: OvermindDL1 (overminddl1_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-09-26 22:54:48

On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Brian Wood <woodbrian77_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Daniel F. Savarese writes:
>> To the OP, I would advise you not take statements such as the above as
>> gospel without performing measurements yourself.  My experience[1] is
>> directly contrary to the above.  I find boost::serialization execution
>> time to be negligible (for binary archives) and entirely suitable for high
>> performance networking applications even if that was not the creator's
>> original objective (a credit to Robert Ramey's skill).
>
>
> With respect for the library and Ramey, I'd like to point out
> that results obtained with the Boost Serialization library are
> frequently less efficient than those from the C++ Middleware
> Writer -- http://webEbenezer.net/comparison.html.
>
> Additionally, the C++ Middleware Writer automates the
> job of writing serialization functions for structs/classes
> unless it is directed not to do so.

I actually do find Boost.Serialization to be very efficient, just the
hobbling point for it is the registry it uses, that slows the whole
thing down.

I just found out about the Google events library thing a few days ago,
I think that could actually make for a very efficient low-overhead
network serializer, but for saving/loading and such, I still use
Boost.Serialization due to its power.  :)