On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 6:12 AM Peter Dimov via Boost <
[hidden email]>
wrote:
I haven't tried that before, but I would be concerned about the ability to
iterate cleanly in the presence of concurrent changes.
I had hoped boost filesystem uses a replaceable back-end so I could target
it against other filesystem providers (other than POSIX, Win32), but I
don't see that architecture internally. :( Would be nice to have a
complete back-end abstraction so one could provide their own.
- Jim
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost