On Feb 11, 2006, at 9:21 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
I don't think anyone is suggesting that we use size_t;
Acually, that's what I would use. I still haven't heard a valid reason why it shouldn't be used. I'm not saying there isn't one - but no one has stated one.
int has the same problem, after all. I thought Matthias wass using a variable-length representation, but on inspection it looks like he's just using a "strong typedef" around std::size_t,
I for one am curious as to the motivation for ths.
That's easy to answer: to achieve separation between archive format and serialization, which is, I believe what you advocate. Leave it to the archive to decide how to serialize sizes of collections - it could be different than serializing the integer type used for std::sized_t
which should work adequately for the purposes we're discussing.
well, so would size_t for what has been dicussed so far.
size_t has problems with portable binary archives.