If you're not modifying the parameter, no need to pass by value. There is also no reason why this should be a "regular" function that takes a value and returns a new object. You might as well take the string as a non-cost lvalue reference and modify it in place.

But it will make calls like: normalize("something") impossible. Why not just create a wrapper function in that case?

This is exactly the point: you shouldn't allow normalize("something") when you obviously really want to modify a string using your normalization routine. What you should be supporting is:

template <class T> void normalize(basic_string<T> &path);

If anybody wants to use this function, they should do:

std::string path = "./foo";
normalize(path);
assert(path == "foo");

Also, this functionality sounds like it's already in Boost.Filesystem and is very specific to filesystem paths that I'm having a hard time seeing whether it's worth having in cpp-netlib.

OK, I see, in that case so should this pull request be closed, if you are not interested to have it. I just thought it could be a good thing to have in the library, especially when it remove any attempts to receive a directory above "wwwroot". But I came up with another thing, sending files in a effective way. See what I have written about it in "uri thread" on the Google groups thread. You can answer there as well, or maybe Glyn.

PS. I will let Glyn close this pull request, when you have decided if this function should be added or not, but if so, please let me know faster, so I don´t waste time.

I've replied to that thread. As far as this pull request is concerned I think it's better if you look at whether Boost.Filesystem does what you want to do before you abandon this work. If it doesn't then it might be worth adding this functionality to that library because this is about filesystem paths already and not URIs.

About not wasting time, the best way to avoid this is to let us know what you want to work on and communicate with us how you intend to do it or while you're doing it. Thanks for the effort and I'm looking forward to your other contributions in the future.

I have been busy, therefore late answer

Well, I currently only use the async_server and the uri class, so anything which make those classes better would I be interested in, specially in async_server implementation. Its robustness, exception safety, the possibility to add more "logging possibilities", performance and so on. Maybe a short web-server example would be a great thing to-do as well, because I already comfortable with async_server impl :-) But in that way, were should I write all questions? Github, google groups?

The best place to let everyone know what you want to work on is the mailing list. There's no other place where the discussions happen but there.

Github issues are reserved for filing bugs. General support and development concerns are discussed in the mailing list (Google groups).

As for the web server example, look at https://github.com/cpp-netlib/cpp-netlib/blob/master/libs/network/example/http/fileserver.cpp which already does practically everything you'd want from a fileserver. If you want to extend that to do other things then be my guest and send a pull request against it.

Let's continue this discussion in the mailing list to get a larger audience involved.