From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-25 21:08:52
David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > What about:
> >
> > assert( p.branch_path().empty() );
> >
> > Isn't that closer to what you are trying to express?
>
> I guess so. I didn't see branch_path().
BTW, it would feel much more natural to me if it were
path root() const;
path branch() const;
path leaf() const;
but because of the portable-ization of non-portable windows path
constructs, I think something this simple is impossible.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com