Boost logo

Boost :

From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-19 17:29:17

is there any chance that we'll see:
         basic_filebuf *basic_filebuf::open(std::string const&,
and of course ...wstring... if the other is adopted?

At Monday 2004-02-16 06:56, you 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 *,
>Depending on the operating system, one of these forms is fundamental and
>the other requires an implementation-defined mapping to determine the
>actual filename.
>Unsubscribe & other changes:

Victor A. Wagner Jr.
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
               "There oughta be a law"

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