----- Original Message ----- Eric Woodruff wrote: > type_info is not portable in the slightest.
I realize that. I just pointed out that it's not so convenient to have user-supplied string ids because of the template classes. Regards, -Vahan > "Vahan Margaryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:003401c28bee$7fbc4f40$4f09a8c0@;lan.mosaic.am... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Ramey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 5:45 PM > Subject: Re: [boost] Serialization Submission version 6 > > > > > > > register_cross_program_class_identifier<class T>(const char *id="T") > > > > This would be invoked for each class declaration. Now we have > > a portable id associated with each class - exactly what we need. > > Polymorphic pointers would archive this tag and use it > > to determine the proper class to construct on loading. > > > > The default class identifier would be the text representation of the class > name. > > (note: in general not necessarily the same as type_info.name() ) > > which is going to be sufficent for almost all cases. > > The problem that usually arises from this is having to make up class ids for > template classes. type_info does this for you. > > Regards, > -Vahan > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost > _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
