Path as an object in std.path

Regan Heath regan at netmail.co.nz
Wed Jun 5 07:12:22 PDT 2013


On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 14:26:39 +0100, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:

> On 6/5/13 7:33 AM, John Colvin wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 5 June 2013 at 07:11:49 UTC, Joshua Niehus wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 5 June 2013 at 06:27:46 UTC, Dylan Knutson wrote:
>>>> "which exposes a much more palatable interface to path string
>>>> manipulation".
>>>> [...snip...]
>>>> I'd like some feedback on what others think about this;
>>>
>>> personally, I prefer the current implementation and found it easy to
>>> use for the multitudes of tiny scripts I've written. I wouldn't like
>>> to create an "object" just to call isAbsolute.
>>>
>>> That being said, I don't see why having the struct would hurt.
>>>
>>> Nice work by the way
>>
>> Is there any reason why we couldn't keep the string-based free functions
>> around as well?
>
> I don't have a strong opinion regarding Path object vs. string  
> functions, and I agree both have advantages and disadvantages. But I  
> would be opposed to having both.

C# has both:
1. System.IO.FileInfo and System.IO.DirectoryInfo non-static/instance  
classes with methods i.e. Delete()
2. System.File and System.Directory static classes with methods accepting  
strings i.e. Delete(string name)

R

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list