From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-05 03:14:28
Beman Dawes wrote:
> >Yes, I think that's so. I attach a patch against CVS HEAD with
> >docs and tests. Could you take a look and tell if anything should be
> * There are two places in the docs where what should be shown as '.' is
> showing up as '.' (browser is IE 6).
Hm... ' is only defined in XHTML, as tidy just reported.
> * empty() is misspelled as empy() in several places. But see next item.
> * I think the preconditions should be removed. In each case, the behavior
> as specified is quite sensible even if ph.leaf().empty(), and may be useful
> in some applications. (Assuming you agree, the assert()'s should be
> removed, and test cases should be added.)
Let me ponder a little. For 'extension', the idea that empty path has empty
extension seems ok. For 'basename' this looks even more resonable. However,
for "change_extension", this is not so. If you call
you'll get ".txt" as result, which has no sense at all. But I'm not sure the
assertion, here, is so big help. So I'll removed precondition here as well,
but add a bit of rationale.
However, I've a question: if is always true that ph.leaf().empty() ==
ph.empty. IOW, is it ever possible to have empty element in the sequence of
strings that compose the path?
> * You have my permission to remove my copyright from the docs and add your
> own. You've contributed all the pieces, so no need to mention me.
> * Please add "Contributed by Vladimir Prus." to each function. I'd like to
> track all contributors.
> * Go ahead and commit to CVS. Then let's keep an eye on the test results
> for a couple of days as the changes get tested on various platforms.
I'll do that later today, when (I hope) my internet connection works again.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk