From: Marcin Kalicinski (kalita_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-20 09:14:44
> The major use I thought of is a scene graph. This typically consists of a
> large number of nodes ( Can be many Mb file) many containing structures of
> points and transforms. I suspect its cheaper to keep these in memory in
> their
> binary format rather than as strings.
What you need to store a scene graph is a generic tree container, not ptree.
Property tree is for storing properties. Anyway, if you want you can
consider customizing data type to be some sort of Object *, but I don't know
if this is going to take you very far.
> Whatever... it would be interesting to see the rationale behind the
> design
> decisions made within the documentation. I *think* that a trade off has
> been
> made in favour of convenience and 'light weight' (I think it would not
> perform
> well on large files for example)
Yes, being light-weight and easy to use it the main goal. I think this is
said in the introduction part of the docs.
>>>Is it necessary to make key a string. Could it not also be (say) an
>>>integer
>>>id?
Library would need some sort of path parsing policy. I think that the only
required function would be to separate head of the path from the tail (sort
of Lisp-like behaviour). This is quite an interesting proposition, I
consider it the most valuable addition to the library at the moment.
Thank you,
Marcin