Deleting an empty folder will NOT save any space.
Deleting an empty folder can WASTE GIGABYTES - not what I use CCleaner for.
I have especially adjusted one folder so that it and all its contents are compressed.
When 2 GByte worth of log file text is written to it, only 1 GByte of disc space is consumed.
The application that writes to this folder could fail if the folder is missing.
I would be annoyed that the author had not anticipated absence,
but more annoyed with CCleaner for a change that has caused inconvenience.
Even if the application included "defensive programming" and recreated folders destroyed by maverick cleaners,
it is unlikely that it would recreate it with my preference that contents be compressed.
I remember that before XP there was AutoExec.bat, which typically emptied the TEMP folder.
Does anyone know if start-up would be successful of AutoExec had an error when removing a missing folder ?
Does anyone know if absolutely EVERY piece of Microsoft code would survive a missing TEMP folder ?
I fully agree with the use of defensive programming that caters for the unexpected,
but totally disagree with needless wanton destruction of folders.
This imposes a special constraint that applications must NOT depend upon a folder,
and deleting the folder has not saved any space.
Some applications may create zero length files for future reference.
Why should they be prohibited from testing the existence of empty folders ?
If your favourite application failed to start properly when an empty log folder is missing,
and instead enters "defensive mode" and recreates the empty folder,
and assumes a new installation and continues to initialise and applied default configuration options,
and then prompted for custom changes to configuration before it does the job you wanted,
would you be happy with CCleaner for causing such pointless aggravation ?
Alan