Mostafa wrote:
Because there's no polymorphic_text_oarchive.cpp counterpart,
I think this is in the src directory. It should be pre-compiled into the library so you never actually see it. The portable binary archive is an example, so it's not included in the library.
There is no polymorphic_text_oarchive.cpp or polymorphic_text_iarchive.cpp in the boost 1.42 source. A search in the source for "polymorphic*archive.cpp" only reveals:
./libs/serialization/example/polymorphic_portable_binary_iarchive.cpp ./libs/serialization/example/polymorphic_portable_binary_oarchive.cpp ./libs/serialization/src/polymorphic_iarchive.cpp ./libs/serialization/src/polymorphic_oarchive.cpp
And the latter 2 files basically only have these explicitly instantiations: template class archive_serializer_map
; template class archive_serializer_map ; Which I don't believe should be replicated in polymorphic_portable_binary_iarchive.cpp or polymorphic_portable_binary_oarchive.cpp since in the boost source code there is no explicit instantiations of the following forms:
template archive_serializer_map
template archive_serializer_map ... etc. BTW, why are you using explicit instantiations with seperate template .cpp files? It becomes a management nightmare keeping track of what needs to be explicitly instantiated in large projects. They're templates, so why not just have everything in headers? An additional advantage being that code is only generated for code that's used (implicitly instantiated) by the client.
OK - you've got me. * The portable_binary_?archive was originally created as an example many years ago to illustrate how one could derive from an existing archive to create a new one. * This got broken - un beknownst to me - when changes were added to the binary_archive to support fast serialization of certain collections. * Then I got a small consulting contract to make a fix in it. Only then did I discover that it had been broken. * So I rewrote it from scratch to fullfill the obligations of the contract. As part of this, I made it work as a polymorphic archive. * Then the binary_?archive got changed again so that the version based derivation would work - not that it mattered by this time. To summarize - I don't remember where which code is is which module. So looks like you're the expert now. I believe that polymorphic...archive is only the thinnest of wrappers. The simple truth is that I don't remember - I would have to go look it up. You're already ahead of me on that. Robert Ramey