I made it as an example on how to extend the library by deriving from an existing archive. To "finish" it would require implementing serialization of floating point types in a portable manner and this turns out to be a non-trivial task. Implementing this would be too much work and would sort of compromise illustrative value of the example. There have been proposals to finish it from time to time but no one has been sufficiently interested to actually do it. Of course there's nothing to prevent you from using it even though its not "part of the library". Also note that I prefer to consider the "archive" part of the serialization library as an "archive construction kit" of with the included archives are just useful and convenient examples. So from this standpoint there is no really argument for including or excluding any particular library. Robert Ramey Oliver.Kowalke@infineon.com wrote:

Hallo, why is portable_binary_oarchive and portable_binary_iarchive only contained in the examples not part of the library interface? Regards, Oliver