[Boost-users] Re: Feature request for boost::filesystem

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-06 05:24:51

David Abrahams wrote:

> Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> writes:
> 
>>> I am always in favor of
>>> designs which are clear and understandable over all other
>>> considerations.
>>
>> And what's so un-understantable about boost::path which has both narrow
>> and wide methods?
> 
> I'm finding it hard to argue with that idea.

You mean it's hard to argue with the idea to have

   class path {
      path(char*)
      path(wchar_t*);
   }

or with the idea to have

   template<class charT>
   class basic_path {
        basic_path(charT*)
   };

or that designs should be clear and understandable? ;-)

- Volodya