Brian Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tuesday, August 19, 2003, at 12:35 AM, Yitzhak Sapir wrote: >> My feeling from all these examples is that a path string is >> inherently specific to the system for which it was specified, and >> can't really be ported to anywhere else. Much like a string is >> usually inherently specific in its encoding to the system-specified >> encoding. However, the filesystem library can provide a portable >> way to manipulate this system specific path, much like the string >> library provides a portable way to manipulate the system-specific >> encoded string. In view of this, why try for a "portable path" at >> all? > > This may have been covered already, but I would go further and assert > that the very concept of a string path is non-portable.
There has to be some way it's expressed on the system, since fopen and fstream take strings. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
