[boost] Re: [Filesystem] Feature Request: One more implementationusing.NET

From: Pavel Chikulaev (pavel.chikulaev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-03 04:19:52

"Edward Diener" <eddielee_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:d2n1vk$62e$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
> Adding an implementation of any Boost library to .net means rewriting at
> least some of that library in managed C++ for net 1.0 or 1.1 or for C++/CLI
> for net 1.2 . I know that managed C++ has no template support ( and under an
> NDA I can not disclose anything I know about .net 1.2 that is not public
> knowledge ) so basically you are asking that the FileSystem library be
> written completely without the use of templates.
>
> Furthermore all C++ modules in net 1.0 and net 1.1 are subject to the DLL
> initialization bug if those modules are created as a .NET assembly using
> mixed mode C++. Mixed mode C++ involves any C++ code which uses the C++
> standard library or the windows API. This bug can occur at any time and
> crash the end-user's application and has nothing to do with the programmer's
> code, thus essentially destroying all mixed-mode C++ programming of
> assemblies for .net 1.0 and .net 1.1. Nor is there any sure workaround for
> this bug. This is all well-documented by Microsoft. So the only real
> alternative for C++ programmers writing assembles for .net 1.0 and .net 1.1
> are to write pure mode managed C++, which is vastly different in many
> respects from standard C++ which Boost promotes.
> 
> Given these truths it would be exceedingly foolish for Boost, or for the
> Boost Filesystem, to be developed for .net as it now exists.
You're absolutely right, but what about 2.0?  It supports templates and 
I believe Microsoft will fix that bug in 2.0. 
The only disadvantage that it's not ready yet.

So, may be we should postpone this question until 2.0 released?

Anyway I don't think it's bad idea to do it with at least .NET 2.0.

--
Pavel Chikulaev