From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-12 13:54:48
Beman Dawes wrote:
> At 02:20 AM 11/12/2004, Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> I'd be much happier with design like this:
>>
>> class path {
>> public:
>> path(char*);
>> path(wchar_t*);
>> string file_string() const;
>> wstring file_wstring() const;
>> };
>
> A single path class approach is really interesting. Note, however,
> that it
> is a good bit more complicated than your synopsis above because of
> the need to provide templated member functions to handle user defined
> types.
Is there _really_ such a need?