Subject: Re: [boost] boost::filesystem::path frustration
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-25 11:30:26
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I'm finding that boost::filesystem::path seems to be a strange mix of
> different beasts, unlike any entity we have in the STL. For example,
> when you construct it from a pair of iterators, they're expected to be
> iterators over characters, but when you iterate over the path itself,
> you are iterating over strings of some kind (**). Even though, once
> constructed, this thing acts sort of like a container, it supports none
> of the usual container mutators (e.g. push_back, pop_back, erase) or
> even queries (e.g. size()), making it incompatible with generic
> algorithms and adaptors.
It isn't really a container, but it is convenient to supply iterators
over the elements of the contained path. Should more container-like
mutators be supplied? I'm neutral - they would occasionally be useful,
but add more signatures to an already fat interface.
> In particular, this comes up because I'm trying to find the greatest
> common prefix of two paths. I thought this would be easy; I'd just use
> std::mismatch. But even once I've found the mismatch I don't see any
> obvious way to chop off the non-matching parts of one of the paths. I
> end up having to resort to some really ugly code (or I just haven't
> figured out how to use this thing correctly).
Not particularly elegant, but this does work:
auto result = std::mismatch(x.begin(), x.end(), y.begin());
for (auto itr = x.begin(); itr != result.first; ++itr)
prefix /= *itr;
std::cout << prefix << std::endl;
> Why should paths be so different from everything else? I think, if the
> design is actually right, some rationale is sorely needed.
> * (**) the docs don't say what the value_type of path::iterator is. A
> string value? A range that becomes invalid when the path is
> destroyed? Ah!?! How surprising; inspecting the code shows it
> iterates over paths! A container whose element type is itself is very
It is a kludge to deal with the type of the contained string being
implementation defined and not necessarily the type the user wants. In
other words, a misuse of path to supply string interoperability. The
returned type should ideally be a basic_string, with begin() and end()
templatized on the string details, but I didn't think of that until
> * the docs claim you can construct a path from a "A C-array. The value
> type is required to be char, wchar_t, char16_t, or char32_t", but
> doesn't say how that array will be interpreted. From the wording I
> might have assumed it accepts a CharT(&)[N] and the length of the
> input is taken as N, but inspecting the code shows it expects a CharT*
> and interprets the source as null-terminated.
I'll make some doc changes per your comments above.