From: Greer, Joe (jgreer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-16 08:00:50
> In looking at this a bit further, both POSIX and windows distinguish
> total free space and free space available "to nonprivileged process"
> or "to caller" (Windows).
> To accommodate this, we might have:
> boost::uintmax_t capacity(path const &);
> boost::uintmax_t total_free_space(path const &);
> boost::uintmax_t available_free_space(path const &);
IMO, total_free_space() and available_free_space() should be tied
together so that you can make some relationship between them. If they
are implemented as separate calls, then you don't really know what disk
activity went on between the first and second calls. I can see a case
where the total_free_space might be < than the available_free_space if
you called the functions in the wrong order and there was disk activity
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk