Matthias Troyer wrote:
I already proposed a similar facility (under the unfortunate name of "registry") in a few previous posts of mine. Yitzhak Sapir has expressed my idea with much better words, so you may count my vote for it, too.On Monday, November 18, 2002, at 02:30 PM, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:I think taking out the pointer facility into a separate class would be better design. By this I mean, that register_type<> and the logic for identifying and maintaining pointers would be in a separate class from the archive. The archive would hold an instance of this class (given in the constructor), and use member functions of this container class to determine what to do when it encounters a new pointer/alias. But it seems to me this is not the case yet (again, correct me if I'm wrong).
I want to second that vote. I would prefer a separate facility for pointer serialization, as an add-on to a serialization library if that is possible. Robert, what do you think, could it be separated out?
Alberto Barbati
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
