Subject: Re: [boost] [Filesystem V3] file_status over-design?
From: Scott McMurray (me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-26 22:11:16
On 23 February 2010 08:26, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> It was designed that way on the assumption that file_status would
> eventually include additional state information.
Would it be plausible for vendor-specific extensions here? It seemed
like the biggest obstactle to providing more was portability, not
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk