Dave Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com> writes:
on Sun Jan 27 2013, Rob Stewart <robertstewart-AT-comcast.net> wrote:
On Jan 25, 2013, at 6:52 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com> wrote:
IMO paths are abstract entities that aren't necessarily realized in the local filesystem. The results of pure path manipulations must therefore not depend on the state of the local filesystem. Operations accepting paths as input that depend on the local filesystem structure should be seen as operations on the filesystem rather than operations on paths.
+1
I also like the idea that a path is a container of elements.
In fact there probably ought to be an object representing the local filesystem, so you could also (in principle) do operations on a remote filesystem. That would very clearly distinguish path operations from filesystem ones: since you don't need a filesystem to manipulate paths, the signatures would differ.
This is exactly what I've been working on recently: mirroring the Boost.Filesystem functions with versions that take an extra argument which, at the moment, I pass my SFTP filesystem object. Alex -- Swish - Easy SFTP for Windows Explorer (http://www.swish-sftp.org)