From: Walter Landry (wlandry_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-11-29 16:59:23
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard <jbms_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Walter Landry <wlandry_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > Right. Not thinking straight. Having an is_symbolic_link() function
> > is certainly still required. However, I think that my proposed syntax
> > would resolve the problem of whether a particular function should
> > resolve symlinks or not.
> As additional property functions (like last_write_time) are added, it
> will be necessary to add such checks to each function. Furthermore, I
> think the resultant syntax is much less clear than the syntax I
> proposed, namely, a "dereference" or "resolve" function (or operator).
> At least to me, exists(*ph) or exists(resolve(ph)) or
> exists(dereference(ph)) is _much_ clearer than exists(ph, true),
> and similarly, last_write_time(*ph) or last_write_time(resolve(ph))
> than last_write_time(ph, true).
The default should be to resolve symlinks, much like POSIX stat.
Since it is mostly POSIX programmers who are going to have to deal
with symlinks, it is best not to make defaults gratuitously different.
As for the choice of names, we could make an enum or typedef with
whatever name you like. Then we could have something like
This seems to be what default arguments were made for.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk