Re: [boost] Filesystem portable path rationale and use-cases

From: Walter Landry (wlandry_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-19 19:49:29

Brian Gray <briangray_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Should we (do we?) have some spreadsheet enumerating various filesystem 
> features, quirks, and limitations for whatever systems we can find, and 
> using that as a reference regarding how to organize features like 
> paths, file references, forks, or whatever else?  It might help us to 
> back out of the code and re-examine the problem domain regardless of 
> the current state of Boost.

I've been thinking that maybe the best way to provide for portable
paths is to have a bunch of flags that you can set.  So when you push
something onto Beman's singleton stack, you can, for example, set the
NTFS and VMS flags if you only care about those filesystems.

However, that makes it difficult to extend to customized portability
restrictions.  That might require some kind of function stack within
each element of the singleton stack.  Then you can push the NTFS and
VMS checkers onto that stack within the stack.

Regards,
Walter Landry
wlandry_at_[hidden]