From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-25 07:45:29
Beman Dawes wrote:
> At 01:10 PM 10/22/2004, Miro Jurisic wrote:
>> boost::fs, as far as I understand it, ran into the problem that it
>> was impossible to sidestep the invariant.
> No, rather than the error check was on by default. Some people want
> it off as the default.
I interpret it a little differently: the "error" check provided no value to
users; in fact, it "provided" a negative value, which is why most prefer
"off by default".
This in itself does not prove that all possible portability checks do not
provide value to users, just that this particular check is a net loss.
By saying that "some people want it off as default" you are discounting the
results of the experiment, attributing them to personal preference. ;-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk