According to Mike Nordell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > |Lots of good stuff snipped| > > One question that comes to mind is: > Do we really need a "file"?
Yes we do. I want to eliminate the direct passing of file path accross the XP code. Just because on MacOS is it not the best way to go (use of path is discouraged to some extent) and on BeOS it is recommended to use file referemces. The idea is that when you open a document, the file requester dialog (platform code) return a file object to pass it to the PD_Document that will open and use it transparently. Note that this is not the kind of stuff I'll do right now, but in the 1.1 branched tree. But I may provide some basic support for it in the current tree for new stuff like stat() and al. If you are curious, look at the BeOS API where they make difference beetween file systeme operations and input/output operations. > Isn't what we really need streams? Input streams and output streams, and > until we really need it (if ever) I'd vote for no combined iostream. That > would AFAIK take care of all of our needs. File specify a file system object. Stream specify an IO channel... > Input could then come from e.g. memory, TCP, UDP (hehe, multicast an AbiWord > document?), disk file, whatever... > > The same for output. Hence the file stream (completely XP code) to whom file operation are handled by the file object (platform code). [...] Hub
