From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-18 20:13:45
"Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>>
>> Sure; I just don't want to have to be explicit about anything just to
>> say "I'm doing native path manipulation", since I believe that's the
>> 90% case. I don't want to be stopped by irrelevant portable path
>> considerations nor uglify my code to avoid it.
>
> I agree except that IMO the 90+% case is "I'm doing generic path
> manipulation" which is portable path format ("x/y", not "x\y" or "x:y") but
> no constraints on charset except of course '/' and '\0'.
Works for me.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com