Dan Bikel wrote:
Robert Ramey wrote:
Error No. 1 can be fixed by making pFoo a const pointer type, i.e., by changing the declaration/assignment statement to be string *const pFoo = new string("foo");
I cannot figure out why such a change is necessary, as the serialization library documentation does not indicate that it is necessary to make pointers const in order to serialize them (as is borne out by the demo.cpp code).
This is explained in the "Rationale" section of the documentation.
Okay, I read through the (long) scenario described in the Rationale section, and I guess I agree with this design decision, but in the main documentation--the Tutorial section in particular--there should not be code snippets that are incorrect. I'm thinking of the example in the "Pointers" section of the tutorial, where the sample code shows *non-const* bus_stop pointers being serialized in order to serialize "bus_route" objects. At the very least, you should have correct code and a hyperlink to the Rationale section explaining why the const is there.
That section of the manual uses the "&" operator rather than the << operator. This operator doesn't enforce the "trap" - in part to give an escape for those who find the trap unhelpful. Actually, there should be a trap - leading to a better error message - for detecting the case you've got here - serialization of a pointer to a prmitive - which needs special treatment. But then - we really should implement concept checking to detect these errors and display better messages. - its on my to do list.
Anyway, I don't mean this to sound harsh, because I'm very grateful for your prompt answer to my question!
--Dan.