Re: [boost] Re: [filesystem] Major changes before standardization

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-12 15:43:19

At 01:54 PM 11/12/2004, Peter Dimov wrote:
 >Beman Dawes wrote:
 >> At 02:20 AM 11/12/2004, Vladimir Prus wrote:
 >>> I'd be much happier with design like this:
 >>>
 >>> class path {
 >>> public:
 >>> path(char*);
 >>> path(wchar_t*);
 >>> string file_string() const;
 >>> wstring file_wstring() const;
 >>> };
 >>
 >> A single path class approach is really interesting. Note, however,
 >> that it
 >> is a good bit more complicated than your synopsis above because of
 >> the need to provide templated member functions to handle user defined
 >> types.
 >
 >Is there _really_ such a need?

That's a good question. I personally think the need for UDT support is too 
marginal to worry about.

I've just posted a query to the C++ Library Working Group's reflector to 
see if anyone there has strong feelings one way or another.

Thanks,

--Beman