From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailsrv.cs.umass.edu (mailsrv.cs.umass.edu [128.119.240.136]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD9973898032 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 23:47:05 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org AD9973898032 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=cs.umass.edu Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=moss@cs.umass.edu Received: from [192.168.0.13] (c-24-62-203-86.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [24.62.203.86]) by mailsrv.cs.umass.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 57335401A593; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:47:05 -0500 (EST) Reply-To: moss@cs.umass.edu Subject: Re: g++ and c++17 filesystem Cc: cygwin@cygwin.com, =?UTF-8?Q?Ren=c3=a9_Berber?= References: <861bc601-876b-e16d-d4f7-0bb543d61d8e@cs.umass.edu> From: Eliot Moss Message-ID: Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:47:05 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, MISSING_HEADERS, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: cygwin@cygwin.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Cygwin discussions and problem reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 23:47:06 -0000 On 11/18/2020 4:18 PM, Kristian Ivarsson wrote: > >> I would agree that if you want an executable that acts and feels more like a Windows native application, then mingw is probably what you want. Cygwin is if you want something that acts and feels more like a Posix thing ... which means it will be oriented to Posix style paths. > To be able to use mingw all the code have to be ported to use Windows native mechanisms and then we might just use MSVC instead > > We don’t want (either) Windows-style-paths or Posix-style-paths, we want A path and expect it to work equally regardless of what platform is used in regards to std::filesystem > > As far as I see, very few applications do form their own - and/or have hard-coded absolute paths and instead they are usually input data (through UI, configuration, OS, environment or such) IN this context, I would say "Which std::filesystem? The Cygwin Posix-like one or the mingw Windows-like one?" If you want uniformity, I'd go with Cygwin; it you want platform-like behavior, then mingw. Best wishes - EM