Re: [boost] boost::filesystem::path frustration

Subject: Re: [boost] boost::filesystem::path frustration
From: Ryo IGARASHI (rigarash_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-01-27 20:40:48

Hi,

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> on Sun Jan 27 2013, Daniel Pfeifer <daniel-AT-pfeifer-mail.de> wrote:
>
>> 2013/1/27 Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>:
>>>
>>> on Sun Jan 27 2013, Rob Stewart <robertstewart-AT-comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jan 25, 2013, at 6:52 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>>
>>
>>>>> IMO paths are abstract entities that aren't necessarily realized in
>>>>> the local filesystem.  The results of pure path manipulations must
>>>>> therefore not depend on the state of the local filesystem.
>>>>> Operations accepting paths as input that depend on the local
>>>>> filesystem structure should be seen as operations on the filesystem
>>>>> rather than operations on paths.
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> I also like the idea that a path is a container of elements.
>>>
>>> In fact there probably ought to be an object representing the local
>>> filesystem, so you could also (in principle) do operations on a remote
>>> filesystem.
>>
>> ... or a virtual filesystem (eg. an archive).
>
> +1

If handling virtual or remote file systems is needed,
isn't it better to generalize 'path' to handle URIs[1]?

[1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt
--
Ryo IGARASHI, Ph.D.
rigarash_at_[hidden]