From: "Beman Dawes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > At 04:08 AM 11/17/2002, Matthias Troyer wrote: > > > >On Sunday, November 17, 2002, at 05:43 AM, David Abrahams wrote: > >> > >> Does anybody else feel they need more time to give this library a > >> thorough going-over? I think we could afford to extend the review for > >> a few more days. I would especially be willing to do so if it would > >> allow for enough discussion for someone like Jeff to make a definitive > >> vote, since he has experience in the domain. > > > >Yes, it would also help me to try get the code working under gcc v. 3 > >and to really test the library, as well as to try provide some extra > >binary formats (e.g. XDR or PVM formats) in order to see if it works > >well. > > > >Could we extend it by one week so that we have another weekend? > > I'm really interested in the XDR format, not because I care about the > format itself, but because others seem to use it as some sort of litmus > test for serialization libraries. Thus knowing that Robert's library > handles XDR well is of interest.
FWIW, in my experience, XML is a better test for whether a serialization library handles custom formats well. Sequence-based, header-only formats are very similar, but a reasonable XML serializer creates a tree-like representation, with nested tags. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
