home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.corp.sgi.com!inn
- From: Vishwanath Raman <vish@corp.sgi.com>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Question about exemplars
- Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 15:38:51 -0800
- Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
- Message-ID: <31475C8B.41C6@corp.sgi.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: penrose.corp.sgi.com
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0S (X11; I; IRIX 5.3 IP22)
- CC: vish@corp.sgi.com
-
- I am building a message library using Exemplars. I write objects from a
- given class hierarchy into a buffer ( contiguously ) and then send the
- buffer accross to a server/peer. I bring the objects back to 'life' by
- invoking a virtual MakeObject method defined through the hierarchy.
-
- The problem is in trying to regenerate a message when the compilers used
- in creating the client/peer and server/peer programs are DIFFERENT.
-
- This I assume is because of the way VTable pointers are stored within
- the class address space.
-
- Any ideas to overcome this problem. Exemplars constitute a cool way of
- regenerating hierarchy objects without parsing...
-
- A standardisation for the way class objects are stored in memory seems
- to be in order???
-
- Thanks a mill for any feedback in advance, Vish
-
- --
- Vishwanath Raman
- vish@corp.sgi.com
-