Allen Yao wrote:

The file is_abstract.hpp in serialization18 and is_abstract.hpp in type traits library (in cvs) have conflict definitions of "boost::is_abstract". May Ramey fix this. For now, I just comment out the latter in order to use serialization18.

I am aware of this. serialization #18 is meant to be compatible with boost 1.31.

In addition, I am confused with the ".ipp" files in libs/serialization/src/ in serialization18. It is strange to write

#include <libs/serialization/src/basic_binary_oprimitive.ipp> // for serialization18

in user code instead of

#include <boost/serialization/basic_binary_oprimitive.ipp> // for serialization17

I wonder why these files can not be just named ".hpp"

It is my practice to distinguish between header files containing declarations to be included by "users" of the library (*.hpp) from function implementations (*.cpp) and template implementations (*.ipp). I moved the *.ipp files to the src directory because they seemed no need for library users to ever include them when building with the library. Since then it has occurred to me that they may be included when one makes a new archive when deriving from an existing one. Accordingly, these *.ipp files will be moved to boost/archive/impl in the next version. This system is helpful to me - I don't know what other peoples views are on this.

when will we see the serialization library in boost cvs, please?

I have made changes to address all issues raised in the recent review. I'm now making changes to permit builds on all the compilers I have. I hope to upload a version compatible with 1.31 "real soon now". I will then build against my cvs tree. Then I will request authorization to check in. It will take a little time. Robert Ramey