[WIP] host/core: Introduce core OS interaction library

[hobyst]

This library from the host abstraction layer is meant to contain useful functions and data structures that while might not really fit into a specific category are crucial for Vita3K to work.

Feedback about the implementation and ideas on what more things could go in such library are more than welcome.

[Macdu]

Can you use fs::path instead of std::filesystem::path please? At least to remain coherent with the rest of the emulator.

[hobyst]

Can you use fs::path instead of std::filesystem::path please? At least to remain coherent with the rest of the emulator.

Isn't the goal in the long term to move away from boost::filesystem to std::filesystem? I'm already using std::filesystem in everything I write so that no modification is needed afterwards.

[Macdu]

The goal is to move away from std::filesystem but we can still use fs::path as an alias for the time being and transition everything (or not and keep the alias) when needed.
By doing this you add some unnecessary fs::path path = fs::path(std_path.wstring()) in the code. I also had to rewrite your file dialog part to use fs instead of std::filesystem in the Android to match the rest of the code because of some Android quirks.

[hobyst]

The goal is to move away from std::filesystem but we can still use fs::path as an alias for the time being and transition everything (or not and keep the alias) when needed. By doing this you add some unnecessary fs::path path = fs::path(std_path.wstring()) in the code. I also had to rewrite your file dialog part to use fs instead of std::filesystem in the Android to match the rest of the code because of some Android quirks.

Got it. I'll change all references to use fs::path. Why the Boost implementation is preferred over the one from the C++ standard library?

[Macdu]

Don't really know, I made the pr #1912 to switch to c++ filesystem and I think it was almost ready to be merged but it got kind of delayed of forgotten. But anyway, I think it's better to either only have std::filesystem or fs::path everywhere at least for consistency.

[hobyst]

Don't really know, I made the pr #1912 to switch to c++ filesystem and I think it was almost ready to be merged but it got kind of delayed of forgotten. But anyway, I think it's better to either only have std::filesystem or fs::path everywhere at least for consistency.

Then wouldn't it be better for the time being to just use std::filesystem on new code so that less code has to be changed for the transition?