On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Klaim - Joël Lamotte
Question: it is not totally clear to me what the proposal wants to do with the boost::filesystem::path class exactly. The example suggests that boost::filesystem::path would be usable for any filesystem implementation. In which case, do you suggest to remove absolute() and cannonical() from boost::filesystem::path so that it would only be possible to get these versions using one of the namespace functions overload of the same name, one for local_filesystem(), the other taking a filesystem as parametter?
In the committee version of the library, absolute() and canonical() have already been removed from class path. I'm holding off a number of changes to the Boost version pending ISO ballot resolution. I don't want to change Boost filesystem only to have to change it yet again if ISO ballot resolution forces a conflicting change. --Beman