From: Dylan Nicholson (dylan_nicholson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-27 00:58:59
--- Ross Smith <r-smith_at_[hidden]> wrote: > Jan Langer wrote:
> > - is the is() function intended to replace is_...() or just an addition.
> > in either case i like it. but we should wait until we have determined
> > how the attribute access system works.
> I had the impression that the is_foo() vs is() forms were being
> presented as two alternative interfaces, with one or the other to be
> chosen after further pondering. Beman, could you clarify please?
> > - i would replace the readonly-flag by writable and readable (and also
> > is_readonly by is_readable and is_writeable). this is much clearer.
> I would too if it was practical, but either way it's too hard to
> implement on Unix. (is_readable() would be easy, just try to open it,
> but is_writable() is next to impossible.)
access(filename, W_OK) == W_OK?
http://www.sold.com.au - SOLD.com.au Auctions
- 1,000s of Bargains!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk