Re: [boost] [filesystem] temp_directory_path() behavior on Windows

Subject: Re: [boost] [filesystem] temp_directory_path() behavior on Windows
From: Rob Stewart (rob.stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-02-03 21:04:48

On February 3, 2015 7:32:37 PM EST, Niall Douglas <s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 3 Feb 2015 at 18:54, Rob Stewart wrote:
> 
> > Given all of the restrictions you've enumerated, it would seem that
> the
> > right behavior is actually to test the existence of a possible
> result
> > and the caller's permission to use it before returning. 
> 
> I think it's faster to iterate all ten in that order actually. The 
> big problem with caching results is that if your temp drive is on a 
> network share, it can come and go over the lifetime of your process.
> 
> In the end, temp files are slow on Windows, as is opening file 
> handles at all actually. That's because on NT you were never supposed 
> to use temp files when you have a NT kernel namespace to use (i.e. 
> named section objects). Unfortunately, those don't play well without 
> a bit of work with iostreams, fopen et al.

I don't understand your response given what I wrote. I meant that those options would be tried in order to see if they resolve to a valid directory the caller has permissions to use and, if not, try the next.

I'll grant that a network resource may be transient, but that can't be helped.

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)