Re: [boost] [filesystem] very minor request

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-08-02 17:21:10

Gennaro Prota wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 04:56:27 -0400, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
> 
>> I really don't think we want to force users to write:
>>
>>    assert( contains_dot( path(foo) ) );
> 
> Why not? Regardless of the example, I think we shouldn't blur the
> distinction between paths and strings, though the latter are perhaps
> the most common *representation* of the former.

That would imply the conversion from const char * should be explicit 
too. Users would have to write:

     assert( contains_dot( path("foo.bar") ) );

instead of:

     assert( contains_dot( "foo.bar" ) );

For simple, script-like programs that do a lot of file operations, that 
is asking a lot of the user.

As far as I can remember, there has never been a complaint from any user 
regarding the converting constructors.

Is there any reason other than a concern for design purity that leads 
you to want explicit constructors?

--Beman