Proposal for std.path replacement

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Sunday 06 March 2011 13:49:59 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Lars T. Kyllingstad" <public at kyllingen.NOSPAMnet> wrote in message
> news:il09fp$2h5d$1 at digitalmars.com...
> 
> > On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 15:54:19 +0100, spir wrote:
> >> What about extending the notion of 'device' (see other post) to cover
> >> 'http://' and "ftp://"?
> >> Would it be complicated?
> > 
> > I don't think std.path should handle general URIs.  It should only have
> > to deal with the kind of paths you can pass to the functions in std.file
> > and std.stdio.
> 
> If std.path doesn't handle uri's, then we'd need a whole other set of
> functions for dealing with uris. And at least a few of the functions would
> overlap. And then people who want to be able to handle both files and uris
> will want functions that will seamlessly handle either. So I think it
> really would be best to just bite the bullet and have std.path handle
> uri's.
> 
> That said, I'm not sure this would be necessary for round 1 of the new
> std.path. Could just be added later.

We do have std.uri, though it's pretty bare-boned at the moment.

- Jonathan M Davis