Thread: losing pointers with destructor

Originally Posted by MK27

Alright!

That said, I am not entirely sure if overloading operator[] is the right thing to do. It kind of makes sense to me, i.e., a directory entry is a file (or information about a file), but then using a named member function might be clearer.

Oh, and if you do overload operator[], you should const overload too: provide a version that works when the directory object is const.

Finally, you might want to take a look at Boost.Filesystem.

Originally Posted by laserlight

That said, I am not entirely sure if overloading operator[] is the right thing to do. It kind of makes sense to me, i.e., a directory entry is a file (or information about a file), but then using a named member function might be clearer.

if you do overload operator[], you should const overload too: provide a version that works when the directory object is const

Unlikely that anyone but me will be using this -- but more generally, I don't mind having to pay attention and read docs and consider that "for the best". Thus: I don't feel a big need to bend over too far backward on the premise that the user won't bother.

Also thinking the directory should always be const, is there a way to do that? (I guess keeping the vector private will have the same effect).

Finally, you might want to take a look at Boost.Filesystem.

Yeah, I noticed that. I am working on my own alternative, the "Hooch C++ libraries"... For some reason every time I approach a new language the first thing I want to do is tree the filesystem. Must be an i/o fetish.