Boost logo

Boost :

From: Edward Diener (eddielee_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-16 09:26:20

Peter Dimov wrote:
> Edward Diener wrote:
> [...]
>> In my discussions
>> on comp.std.c++, particularly with Mr. Plauger, I was more or less
>> told that the committee had already made up its mind not to support
>> wide character
>> file names. He was pretty intolerant to the thought that wide
>> character file names should be added with the proviso that their
>> meaning should be implementation defined.
> You might be interested in the upcoming LWG Issue #454:
> basic_filebuf::open should accept wchar_t names []
> Bill Plauger
> 30 Jan 2004
> basic_filebuf *basic_filebuf::open(const char *,
> ios_base::open_mode);
> should be supplemented with the overload:
> basic_filebuf *basic_filebuf::open(const wchar_t *,
> ios_base::open_mode);
> Depending on the operating system, one of these forms is fundamental
> and
> the other requires an implementation-defined mapping to determine the
> actual filename.

Is there a place on the Internet where I can track this without being a
committee member ? I am interested in the outcome to this, and contributing
comments if possible. Also is the intent of this that
basic_fstream<>::open(const wchar_t *, ios_base::open_mode) be supported
also, or is this an implied outcome of the above ?

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