----- Mensaje original ----- De: bwood <brass@mailvault.com> Fecha: Sábado, Febrero 18, 2006 7:42 pm Asunto: Re: [boost] [serialization] exception-safety of container-serialization

Joaquín M López Muñoz wrote:

...

I would NOT go for the strong guarantee for the following two reasons:

...

1. Given the basic guarantee, all-or-nothing semantics can be implemented externally, and as efficiently as you'd do it internally. 2. It might be of interest to keep a partially recovered object. For instance, think of the situation in which a container is being marshalled thru a socket and you lose internet conectivity.

I started to reply to this and then wondered if I understood what you meant. Were you talking about the container as the "partially recovered object" or an object that will be stored by the container?

The former.

The subsequent discussion I guess points to the latter. I think the first case is interesting. If a program sends 100 objects and another receives 99 of them no problem, it would probably be helpful to get that information back to the sender so the whole thing isn't repeated. Does Boost:: serialization support this?

It does, at least for STL containers: if an error is found during the process of loading elements into a container, the container retains the elements succesfully loaded so far. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost