From: Matthias Troyer (troyer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-10 23:55:03
On Feb 10, 2006, at 8:39 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Matthias Troyer <troyer_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>
>>>> It's still not clear what this should be changed to - if in fact it
>>>> should be changed at all. std::size_t is a candidate - but I was
>>>> under the impression that there might be interest in defining a
>>>> special type for this - like collection_size_t or ?
>>>
>>> Indeed that's what's needed, and I have all the patches ready that
>>> would need to be applied to do it.
>>
>> Please, guys, get this into 1.34. It's embarassing and a little
>> frustrating that this problem has persisted so long.
>
> It turns out that the internal library version number is going to be
> bumped from 3 to 4 in the next release. This has been necessary
> to implement a correction to versioning of items of collections. So
> its not a bad time to make such a change if that is indeed what
> is necessary.
>
> My question is - what is the urgency. The current system would
> inhibit the serialization of collections of greater than 2 G objects.
> But as far as I know no one has yet run into that problem. So
> I'm curious - has the usage of 32 bit count of objects created
> some problem somewhere else?
We have some vectors that are larger and which we cannot serialize
using Boost.Serialization at the moment
Matthias