Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-19 18:17:26

Brian Gray <briangray_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On Tuesday, August 19, 2003, at 12:35 AM, Yitzhak Sapir wrote:
>> My feeling from all these examples is that a path string is
>> inherently specific to the system for which it was specified, and
>> can't really be ported to anywhere else. Much like a string is
>> usually inherently specific in its encoding to the system-specified
>> encoding. However, the filesystem library can provide a portable
>> way to manipulate this system specific path, much like the string
>> library provides a portable way to manipulate the system-specific
>> encoded string. In view of this, why try for a "portable path" at
>> all?
> This may have been covered already, but I would go further and assert
> that the very concept of a string path is non-portable.

There has to be some way it's expressed on the system, since fopen
and fstream take strings.

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at