Boost logo

Boost Users :

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-20 08:52:08

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:42:03 -0400, David Abrahams wrote
> "Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
> >> The only use I can see is that you at run-time can ensure that some
> >> application generated paths (e.g. path(root / "mysubdir")) are
> >> portable but why base an entire library on such a small thing.
> >
> > It's a big thing to me.
> It's clear there are two usage models, then, because I have the same
> experience as Martin does. It's unfortunate that the filesystem
> library is biased towards one model and makes the other one difficult
> to work with.

I don't consider an extra constructor parameter 'difficult'. Sure, maybe the
default should be flipped around -- I'd be fine with that. I give much credit
to Beman for listening on this issue because personally I found a large lack
of support for handling the portable path issue in languages like 'perl' that
supposedly provide good cross-platform libraries.


Boost-users list run by williamkempf at, kalb at, bjorn.karlsson at, gregod at, wekempf at