-----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Edward Diener Sent: 01 September 2007 07:25 To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Filesystem] Native Pathname Format
Hughes, James wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Edward Diener Sent: 31 August 2007 00:05 To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: [Boost-users] [Filesystem] Native Pathname Format
I can not determine from the Filesystem documentation, nor the reference documentation which comes with it, what is the acceptable syntax for the native pathname format. It appears one must start the native pathname format with //: in order for it to be recognized, but I can not tell from what appears to me to be very confusing documentation whether this is so for the Boost Fileystem implementation. This would mean, let's say under Windows, that "c:\afile" would not be recognized but that "//:c:\afile" would be recognized, as far as I can make out from the documentation. It sure is confusing IMO.
Can anybody clarify how this works for Filesystem and/or where there is a clear explanation of how it works in the documentation ?
Take a look at the code itself - it's pretty self explanatory. Native means precisely that - it uses the native OS format (which reading the code is windows or posix in 1.33 - see the checker functions)
Boost/filesystem/Path.hpp
Have to agree on the docs though - very hard to read or find anything you want, probably because of the TR1 requirement being unreadable in the first place!
If the only way to use a Boost library is to study the code, because the doc does not give me the simple explanation which I want, then the library is not for me.
There is the Boost docs project, but I am not sure how that all works/purpose. I have found that even having to read source every now and again (you don't have to for all the libs - some docs are very good/easy to use!) is still quicker than implementation/test of your own code. It's the age old problem - people who write libraries, generally don't like to write documentation (otherwise we would all be technical authors), and in many ways, are not the best people to write the documentation in the first place. James This message (including any attachments) contains confidential and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee. Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender immediately.