Leon Timmermans wrote:
Reading this discussion, I'm getting the feeling that filename literals are increasingly getting magical, something that I don't think is a good development. [...]. I don't want to deal with Windows' strange restrictions on characters when I'm working on Linux. I don't want to deal with any other platform's particularities either.
I'd like to agree, and also suggest that the use-case for filename literals probably favors the native approach.
Most applications should not hard-code filename constants: they should use config files, ask users, or programatically construct them from other information. OTOH, one-liners and throw-away scripts will frequently hard code these things. So the filename literal syntax should optimize for this usage: a 90% solution that makes easy things trivial (but requires hard things to use an IO CTOR) seems to me to be what I'd want for a one-liner.
