Re: [boost] Re: [filesystem] Operations predicates

From: Iain K. Hanson (iain.hanson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-04 09:56:08

On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 13:19 +0300, Peter Dimov wrote:
> Beman Dawes wrote:
> > "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > news:000e01c54fdb$be752eb0$6401a8c0_at_pdimov2...
> >> I also don't like the fact that the error codes aren't the standard
> >> errno E* constants, but we already had this debate once. :-) (As
> >> with threading, it is my opinion that Posix should be acknowledged.)
> >
> > The intent _is_ to supply the actual system error code (errno for
> > POSIX). There is another function available to convert to a portable
> > code if desired.
> 
> My point was that errno should be the portable error code. This will save 
> you one mapping. Your arguments for not using E* were purely 
> implementation-driven and at this stage of the library development it makes 
> sense to revisit the issue from standardization point of view. 

I agree that it is time to re-visit these issues and they are going to
apply to more than just the Filesystem library. I don't believe The E*
names are portable to non-posix systems which includes ( at least part
of ) Windows.

I think that by default, C++ libraries should return C++ error names and
not POSIX or any other platform or native error names. There should
probably be a convention for mapping between exception names and error
names. This will ease the programmers task as the move between
platforms.

just my 2p worth.

/ikh

_______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all known viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
_______________________________________________________________________