David Bergman wrote:
On Dec 1, 2009, at 1:21 PM, Jeremy Pack wrote:
So, we have two issues:
1. Compilation time. Have you a guesstimate as to much time is spent on parsing, compiling and linking (see #2 below) Boost.Serialization for a case with N simple container outputs?
FYI - I ran the indicated test. Time to make changes in code - about a minute Time to compile link and run - undetectable. This might be in part due the the fact that I use boost serialization dll so it already has most of the code pre-compiled. Oh - and BTW it compiled, linked and ran the first time
2. The extra size on executables (or libraries) given the linked-in; to give you some insight into this, when compiling the examples provided in this thread, the code size increased by 28k when linking the (MT version) of Boost.Serialization with the executable.
I still believe it is a false notion that Boost.Serialization would add that much more than any non-trivial proposal in terms of compilation time or size of output.
Again, I think the boost serialization library - and boost in general - - and templated code in general - gets a bad wrap for being "heavy weight". With a little bit of thoughtful design and usage - I never have this problem. Robert Ramey