At 12:56 AM 2/28/2003 -0500, you wrote: >On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 12:49:59AM -0500, Pierre A. Humblet wrote: >>OK, following Chris' remarks here is a much smaller set >>of changes. > >Do you think it would make sense to do something along the lines >of: >>+ path_conv pc (cfd->is_device ? cfd->get_name () : cfd->get_win32_name (), PC_SYM_NOFOLLOW);
I guess one could but judging from the times I see in strace it's not really justified. On the other hand that's something that we could look at after you integrate your code. There could eventually be a single get_name returning what's appropriate. Pierre