From: Keith Burton (kb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-27 01:42:43
Does using last_write_time leave an opportunity for false negative
because it has been updated in between obtaining the value for each
filename? Would using creation_time ( if available ) be safer ?
[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Beman Dawes
Sent: 26 November 2004 19:43
To: boost_at_[hidden]; boost_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [boost] Unexpected behaviour of
I couldn't see an easy way to determine the drive needed for calling
As an alternative, I removed the st_dev test and added a last_write_time
test. Documentation also updated. See current CVS. To make it easier to
experiment, I also added in the test directory a program equivalent.cpp.
This seems to solve the problem.
Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk