...

I'll see if I can get a test case thrown together for std::bitset. I'll take a look at boost::tuple as well (but that should be big time trivial, so... :) )

Erh... trivial, but tedious. Seeing as I have to redo the serialize funtion for all possible lengths of a tuple (0 to 10 contained elements). Unless I missed something obvious? (again)

Anyway, is serialization for tuples supposed to be a Boost.Serialization add-on or a Boost.Tuples add-on? As Jeff Garland mentioned, generally std::* should be in Serialization, and anything else in the respective library. However, Boost.Serialization already provides support for e.g. shared_ptr<> and Boost.Optional. So...?

This question has come up before without being explicitly/publicly agreed upon. Jeff Garland and I have come to the following consensus: Serialization for standard containers and objects, ie members of namespace std:: will go into the boost::serialization namespace and their corresponding test will go into the serialization test library. Other serialization implementations will go into the namespace/test set of their respective libraries. All maintainence of serialization modules will be responsibility of their respective authors. There are a few boost classes in the serialization library which ended up there during development of the library. shared_ptr is and example. These are anomalous cases and not a pattern that will be continued. Obviously, its my desire to keep the serialization library as task of O(1000) rather than O(1000 + N). So that's our policy. Robert Ramey