RE: creating a transparent interface for serialization?

To be fair, neither is java, in that jit compresses your code paths, *chuckling*

We talking file size or code in cache on the CPU?

I'll go away now, *grin*.

And please God don't answer this post.

Take care,
Sina
 
-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Perry
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 1:20 PM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: creating a transparent interface for serialization?

I read the message and what I am saying is you said that Boost was large that 
is not true.  Unless of course you include the whole
library or something.

ken

-----Original Message-----
From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tyler Littlefield
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 9:13 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: creating a transparent interface for serialization?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

You apparently didn't read the message. Sina mentioned hybernate, and I said 
that from what I could tell, Hybernate is java, and
this is being done in c++. Before you throw things and accuse me of "whining," 
please read the message.
On 10/8/2010 4:54 AM, Ken Perry wrote:
> Um you mention a java library then you wine about space Boost takes up.
> When you go more generic you also go larger.  Now I will say if your 
> binaries are growing that large while using boost you are doing 
> something wrong.  I use boost in my mud engine and when it is compiled 
> with all debugging its 12 mb without its only 900k and before I used 
> boost to clean up some of the structures it was 1.2 mb.  So I would 
> say you might want to check what you're doing.
> 
> As for boost not being transparent it is one of the simplest ways to 
> make
an
> object serializable.  If you come up with something better with the 
> same functionality I say more power to you.
> 
> Ken
> 
> Ken
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tyler 
> Littlefield
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 1:13 AM
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: createing a transparent interface for serialization?
> 
> Have you actually used boost before? It's great... if you don't care 
> that your binary size just increased by a lot. And we're talking mb, 
> not
kb.
> Either way, it's not transparent. It takes different types of objects.
> So you'd have to rework serialization through each function that the 
> object was passed to.
> On 10/7/2010 9:33 PM, Dave wrote:
>> C++ boost. 
> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Oct 7, 2010, at 8:05 PM, Tyler Littlefield <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> - From what I can tell: hybe seems to be a library for Java; is there 
>> something similar for c++?
> 
>> On 10/6/2010 9:31 AM, Sina Bahram wrote:
>>>>> Have you examined ORM solutions? Hibernate is very popular, for
> example.
>>>>>
>>>>> Take care,
>>>>> Sina
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tyler 
> Littlefield
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 11:20 AM
>>>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Subject: createing a transparent interface for serialization?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>> I want to set up serialization of objects in my mud engine a bit
> differently than it currently is.
>>>>> Right now, Ijust write all the values to a file in binary form, 
>>>>> then
> read them back in in the same order, but Iwant the user to be
>>>>> able to choose xml, binary, or any other sort of backend they want 
>>>>> for
> serialization.
>>>>> So, Ihave a question. how should this be done? the idea would be 
>>>>> for
> each object to call a function, without having to know what it
>>>>> is storing.
>>>>> I've thought my player file will look like this:
>>>>> <player>
>>>>> <name>ty</name>
>>>>> <password>asdfghjklasdfghjkl</password>
>>>>> </player>
>>>>> so Isuppose Ican just do a key-value sort of setup where Isend the
name
> and the value, and binary can ignore the name while XML does
>>>>> not?
>>>>> That being said though, I still need to set it up a bit 
>>>>> differently
> from that, so any help is appriciated with suggestions and
>>>>> ideas.
>>>>>
>> __________
>> View the list's information and change your settings at 
>> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
> 
>> __________
>> View the list's information and change your settings at 
>> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at 
> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>>
>> __________
>> View the list's information and change your settings at 
>> http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
> 
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind




- --
Thanks,
Tyler Littlefield
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMrxjRAAoJELDPyrppriJPz+UH/Agha+buxtLB62iAgfBHMa67
2JuA2SVJRo7lvLv4sJstShTXDGdg3vpHzwDnFRipMJqOT6nWvnMatDbaBC3ZUJFb
lJPTTuCrKx8u8zi/U1+rjegRuFQ81CdetPFn1TBSInM84nAXMEFXNjm9/nOqntKp
dW0llcUBxmAM35LI8PgwzWHhW6Shs900qVNQfqCjYZ5NZNohlQr45R1H26x9rYb/
KyHiYdOiAZEJOAioHBHL1SH+NJd5R8aRXqOjdu5eTOxrf09kKX0JI7GYAbwoeU5L
kGQ2iJRcGmAOo6Zz+g8gFfbxg0mo3HLZkKtXV2dC0QEsHwlYOBhp4GjBvrV3OV8=
=wpV9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
http://www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

Other related posts: