RE: [boost] Re: Design for a file system library

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-23 14:33:44

Jeff,

In the document (which I really should have called Requirements and General 
Specs, to distinguish from detailed design) I didn't want to get into 
details to the point where I specified which (or all) of these would be 
valid:

   //  get() and remove() on names
   for (dir_it i ("/usr/junk"); i != dir_it (); ++i)
   {
     if (!get <is_directory> (compose ("/usr/junk", *i)))
     {
       remove (compose ("/usr/junk", *i));
     }
   }

   //  get() and remove() on iterators
   for (dir_it i ("/usr/junk"); i != dir_it (); ++i)
   {
     if (!get <is_directory> (i))
     {
       remove (i);
     }
   }

The first is minimalist, the second easier to use.

We have to have the first (path) forms, because iterators aren't always 
available (without doing an unnecessary search).

Also supplying the iterator forms provides ease-of-use.  If (as I think 
will happen) we really only have a few functions, also providing the 
iterator forms would not hugely increase the size (and thus cost).

--Beman