Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [GSoC] Some Ideas about the Boost.Process
From: John Bytheway (jbytheway+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-24 16:43:14

Felipe Tanus wrote:
> Hi John, thank you for the answer.
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:34 PM, John B. Turpish <jbturp_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> [...] but I could
>> see reasons why someone would intentionally mess with argv[0]. Maybe
>> support the current API and add a convenience function?
> I can't see why someone would mess with argv[0]. Considering that
> there is a motive to do that, your suggestion would fit perfectly. Can
> you please give me an example?

There are executables that behave differently depending on the name in
argv[0], such as ccache ( which emulates
different compilers. Normally this happens by creating appropriately
named symlinks, but perhaps someone might want to do it directly? Would
the current interface support that?

John Bytheway

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at