On 1:59 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:32 PM, vicente.botet <vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
Hi,
[...]
In my humble opinion cygwin is a wrapper of posix intefaces under windows OS. [...]
What's the experience of others? Boost.Filesystem V2 implementation code provided an option on Windows of compiling under GCC using the POSIX API. It was difficult to test, rarely worked well, was a source of confusion, and wasted too much of my time. So Filesystem V3 and Boost.System dropped any pretense of compiling with the POSIX API on Windows. There have been no complaints so far.
FWIW, I vaguely recall some time ago trying to get a straight-CygWin regression test going. (Or was it just building boost?) It didn't go well and I bagged it: paths were coming out in both CygWin (correctly: /cygdrive/c/...) and Windows native ('C:\...'), and I couldn't quite track it down to a single point of failure. As another aside, CygWin's license is much less desirable than MinGW's: <http://tinyurl.com/npkref>