"Robert Ramey" <ramey@rrsd.com> writes:
To summarize how we arrived here. =================================
<snip>
e) So it has been proposed binary_iarchive be re-implemented in the following way
iarchive - containg default implementation of load_array binary_iarchive - ? presumablu contains implementaion of load_array in terms of currently defined load_binary
Its not clear whether all archives would be modified in this way or just binary_iarchive.
This is extremely discouraging. After I stated many times that our design had been changed so as NOT to modify any code in the serialization library, after we put the array-optimized archives in a separate sub-namespace so that they could live alongside the existing ones in the library, after I offered to put all of the code in some remote part of Boost not associated with the serialization library, you state that we are proposing to change the serialization library code. It might be possible to attribute most of the other misapprehensions, misstatements, and gratuitous and insulting peremptory dismissals in your post to cluelessness or lack of attention, but it's really hard to understand how a claim that we propose to change the library could be made in good faith. It appears to be the sort of "when did you stop beating your wife?" response that injects a false presumption into the conversation and puts the other party at an unfair disadvantage. You stated on 19 Nov. we would start with a clean slate. If you've changed your mind, please let us know now; it would certainly be a waste of time to carry on any further discussion if it's going to go this way. If we've misunderstood your posting, we'd very much appreciate an explanation of what you do mean. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com