Boost logo

Boost :

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-13 12:12:50

At 09:16 PM 11/12/2004, Peter Dimov wrote:
>Beman Dawes wrote:
>> It might be messy to make the single path class approach work if
>> Windows is viewed as a dual rather than wide O/S.
>> path p;
>> p /= "foo";
>> if ( some_bool ) p /= L"kühl";
>> if ( exists( p ) ) ... // use wide or narrow API depending on
>> some_bool
>> I guess path objects could keep track of whether or not they had ever
>> been modified by an argument other than a char string, and use the
>> Windows wide API. Seems messy...
>It's worse. Some versions of Windows (9x) are narrow-minded, but you
>know that at compile time. ;-)

Damn! I always forget about Win 9x; I moved the NT at the first beta and
never looked back.

So what happens in Win 9x when you use the wide API?

>You pretty much have to treat Windows as a dual OS; it's impossible to
>choose a native character type until the program is run.

That's a concern. The codepage issue you brought up is also a concern. I
need to do some more research, clearly.

In thinking more about a single path class versus a class path template,
the single path class approach looks really tough is you can't identify a
single native character type. Yet the single path class approach is really
appealing in many ways.


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