From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-23 13:31:46
Beman Dawes wrote:
> At 09:03 PM 4/21/2003, Edward Diener wrote:
> >Beman Dawes wrote:
> >> ...
> >> Once the portable case is handled, then I'm willing to see if
> native >> format paths with wild-cards can be accommodated. But
> solving the >> portable case seems to me to be most important.
> >I can see the theoretical importance of a portable regex-based
> filter but >the practical importance of providing non-portable
> filters for specific
> >in the filesystem library.
> Well, if you think it is that important, why don't you try to come up
> a specific proposed solution? That's much more likely to result in
> action than just urging other people to do the work. The solution
> would have to
> have a portable grammar, plus at least the Windows and POSIX wild-card
> grammars. There would have to be specification of which functions
> support wild cards, and a bunch of portable, Windows, and POSIX test
My proposed solution for native Windows wildcards is that "*" and "?" only
be supported, and that the Windows API FindFirstFile(Ex)/FindNextFile be
used to do the filtering. Other native solutions are best left to experts in
If I think of something good for a portable wildcard solution, I will be
glad to convey it on this NG.
Finally I am not urging others to do the work, I am just making suggestions.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk