> >"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I am not sure that it should be the responsibility of the path class to >> enforce some notion of portability.
I haven't been following this whole discussion, but I'll chime in here b/c I believe some of this might be partially due to comments I made during initial development. The basic scenario for this is: 1) I'm developing a script-like application that manipulates files. In particular it generates a bunch of file and pathnames. 2) I'd like to develop this on one platform and expect that it will port to others without modification. Therefore, I want the library to help me with this by helping me aviod non- portable paths. Of course if I'm developing for a single platform then I don't need this. I think the current design does this pretty nicely. Jeff _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
