From: Marcin Kalicinski (kalita_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-21 16:18:16
> as I've stated elsewhere in this thread for other reasons, there is a need
> for a separate path class/concept. A path could have constructor taking a
> string and an optional separator. The path would expose iterators ala
I have toyed with that idea (path objects) when I was thinking about
configurable separators. The reason why I used it was because I thought it
might complicate interface, at least conceptually, if not syntactically.
Simplicity of use was generally #1 goal, otherwise people would just prefer
to use MSXML, Expat, TinyXML etc. I might need to reconsider it if I add key
policies to traits.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk