From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-18 16:46:20
David Abrahams wrote:
> Sure; I just don't want to have to be explicit about anything just to
> say "I'm doing native path manipulation", since I believe that's the
> 90% case. I don't want to be stopped by irrelevant portable path
> considerations nor uglify my code to avoid it.
I agree except that IMO the 90+% case is "I'm doing generic path
manipulation" which is portable path format ("x/y", not "x\y" or "x:y") but
no constraints on charset except of course '/' and '\0'.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk