Robert Ramey a écrit :
Loïc Joly wrote:
Robert Ramey a écrit :
Of course, if I replace B const *pc by B *pc, then the code works correctly.What can I do to serialize pointers to const data ?
Regards,
Or you could replace this above with: ar & const_cast<B *>(pc); (or maybe const_cast<B * &>(pc)
But that would override the normal meaning of "const" as applied to a member variable.
In this case, the member variable is not const. It's not like in http://www.boost.org/libs/serialization/doc/serialization.html#const . It's just a non const pointer that refers to a non const class defined elsewhere, but that promise not to modify that class himself.
correct. Its a non-const pointer to a const object. But if the object is const then it is prohibited from being modified. Serialization has no special privleges in this regard.
My only issue is that the other objetc is not const, and in fact, it has already been saved before. It is just const seen from A point of view. But I understand that is would be quite difficult to differenciate such a case from a case where the only access to the B object is through A. I think I will use this const_cast. This is I think the first time I find any use for a const_cast. Thank you for your help, -- Loïc