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

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-06 07:46:44

Beman Dawes wrote:
> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:00b901c55092$d30fc300$6401a8c0_at_pdimov2...
>> Beman Dawes wrote:
>>> "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>>> news:000e01c54fdb$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.
>
> On a POSIX system that would work well. But what happens on a
> non-POSIX system? The E* macros won't be defined in <cerrno>. How
> will the user get access to them? Are you suggesting they be defined
> in one of the filesystem headers? I don't see how that would work.

I am suggesting that they shall be defined in <cerrno>.

If this doesn't seem acceptable to you, I am not opposed to the filesystem 
library defining its own aliases of all applicable E* constants. If this is 
the case, I am suggesting that there shall be an 1:1 mapping of aliases to 
E* names and that the aliases shall have the same value as the corresponding 
E* names.