From: David Abrahams (abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-28 13:50:56
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michiel Salters" <Michiel.Salters_at_[hidden]>
> BTW Unix doesn't have extensions. '.' just happens to be a legal
> and common character in a filename.
Likewise on MacOS
> Which incidentally gets us
> to the next level of unportability: file attributes & rights. Which begs
> the question, making e.g. a file::set_read_only(bool) function
> optional allows programs to be portable from WinNT to UNIX but
> not everywhere. Is that a gain or a loss?
I don't know. I think a reasonable behavior /might/ be to do nothing if the
feature is unsupported in this case.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk