From: Matthias Troyer (troyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-10-10 06:33:36
On Oct 10, 2005, at 7:21 AM, troy d. straszheim wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 02:15:44PM -0700, Robert Ramey wrote:
>
>> With this approach you would make one fast_oarchive adaptor class
>> and one small and trivial *.hpp file for each archive it is
>> adapted to.
>>
>
>
> And I've done this for a few archive types. Works fine. The
> portable_binary_archive example, does the same thing, except it does
> so for save(), like this:
>
>
> class portable_binary_oarchive :
> public
> boost::archive::binary_oarchive_impl<portable_binary_oarchive>
> {
> typedef portable_binary_oarchive derived_t;
> typedef
> boost::archive::binary_oarchive_impl<portable_binary_oarchive>
> base_t;
>
> // default fall through for any types not specified here
> template<class T>
> void save(const T & t){
> base_t::save(t);
> }
> void save(const unsigned int t){
> save_impl(t);
> }
> };
>
>
> Which I've also used. AFAICT, I could do what I've needed to do so
> far either way. What's the difference? Apologies in advance if I've
> missed something in the docs.
For a portable binary archive this solution is perfect. For fast
array serialization a similar approach has problems, as I outlined
under point 3 and 4 in my response to Robert Ramey: you need to
specifically overload _in the archive_ for all classes that want to
make use of fast array serialization, thus introducing a tight
coupling between archive and class to be serialized, as well as
making it hard to extend.
Matthias