Re: encapsulating directory operations

"Janis Papanagnou" <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:100je5c$2l1b2$1@dont-email.me...

certainly useful to be supported as library functions. And I'd
write and provide directory abstractions also as add-on library
functions (as opposed to part of a language; but my opinion on
that is not strong). Historically other languages even missed to
>
To sum up; on the way from the OS entity to the user interface
there's various abstraction levels. Depending on the service I'd
like to provide I'd probably choose different abstraction layers.
I _don't_ think that a directory abstraction should be *inherent*
part of the C language, but if necessary provided as a _library_.

Sorry if I didn't specify that clearly.

Of course I expect the directory handling to be in a library.

Just as fopen() is in the library section of the C90 standard.

The question is whether at least "half baked" directories
should/could have been added the C90.

It would have violated the "existing practice" spirit (which
doesn't bother me - note - I failed to explicitly state this),
but it wouldn't have violated the "portable" spirit.

So long as you are careful and keep it "half-baked", you
can have a portable file system in the spirit of C90
portability.

There were reasons this couldn't be done in 1990 (actually,
it is C89 that matters here, so 1989 - and in fact, it was a
static draft even earlier than that). But I wish to do it now,
belatedly.

BFN. Paul.