3015. copy_options::unspecified underspecified

Section: 31.12.13.4 [fs.op.copy] Status: C++20 Submitter: Tim Song Opened: 2017-08-24 Last modified: 2021-02-25

Priority: 3

View all other issues in [fs.op.copy].

View all issues with C++20 status.

Discussion:

31.12.13.4 [fs.op.copy]/4.8.2 says in the copy-a-directory case filesystem::copy performs:

for (const directory_entry& x : directory_iterator(from))
  copy(x.path(), to/x.path().filename(), options | copy_options::unspecified);

Presumably this does not actually mean that the implementation is free to set whatever copy_option element it wishes (directories_only? recursive? create_hard_links?), or none at all, or – since unspecified behavior corresponds to the nondeterministic aspects of the abstract machine (6.9.1 [intro.execution]/3) – a nondeterministically picked element for every iteration of the loop. That would be outright insane.

I'm fairly sure that what's intended here is to set an otherwise-unused bit in options so as to prevent recursion in the options == copy_options::none case.

[2017-11-08]

Priority set to 3 after five votes on the mailing list

This wording is relative to N4687.

1. Edit 31.12.13.4 [fs.op.copy] p4, bullet 4.8.2 as indicated:

   1. (4.7) — Otherwise, if is_regular_file(f), then:

      […]

   2. (4.8) — Otherwise, if

      is_directory(f) &&
      ((options & copy_options::recursive) != copy_options::none ||
      options == copy_options::none)
      

      then:

      1. (4.8.1) — If exists(t) is false, then create_directory(to, from).

      2. (4.8.2) — Then, iterate over the files in from, as if by

         for (const directory_entry& x : directory_iterator(from))
           copy(x.path(), to/x.path().filename(), options | copy_options::unspecifiedin-recursive-copy);
         

         where in-recursive-copy is an exposition-only bitmask element of copy_options that is not one of the elements in 31.12.8.3 [fs.enum.copy.opts].

   3. (4.9) — Otherwise, for the signature with argument ec, ec.clear().

   4. (4.10) — Otherwise, no effects.

[2018-1-26 issues processing telecon]

Status to 'Tentatively Ready' after striking the words 'Exposition-only' from the added text

[2018-3-17 Adopted in Jacksonville]

Proposed resolution:

This wording is relative to N4687.

1. Edit 31.12.13.4 [fs.op.copy] p4, bullet 4.8.2 as indicated:

   1. (4.7) — Otherwise, if is_regular_file(f), then:

      […]

   2. (4.8) — Otherwise, if

      is_directory(f) &&
      ((options & copy_options::recursive) != copy_options::none ||
      options == copy_options::none)
      

      then:

      1. (4.8.1) — If exists(t) is false, then create_directory(to, from).

      2. (4.8.2) — Then, iterate over the files in from, as if by

         for (const directory_entry& x : directory_iterator(from))
           copy(x.path(), to/x.path().filename(), options | copy_options::unspecifiedin-recursive-copy);
         

         where in-recursive-copy is an bitmask element of copy_options that is not one of the elements in 31.12.8.3 [fs.enum.copy.opts].

   3. (4.9) — Otherwise, for the signature with argument ec, ec.clear().

   4. (4.10) — Otherwise, no effects.