Le 13/09/11 19:55, John Maddock a écrit :
"The best is the enemy of the good."
Voltaire's famous bon mot applies to a replacement for Boost.Timer. I've had a "good", although not "best", replacement ready since circa 2006. It has always been set aside waiting for something better. The data-time, std::chrono, boost::chrono, boost::stopwatch, and probably others, were all candidates.
I'm tired of waiting.
Me too!!
http://beman.github.com/timer/ documents a useful replacement for Boost.Timer. The full library has been in the sandbox for years, but current development is on GitHub.
See https://github.com/Beman/timer
I'd like to move the header into boost/system/pending or boost/system/detail, and the rest into the appropriate libs/system subdirectories. The library will be proposed for a full review, or a mini-review if enough other Boost libraries start using it. If Endian gets accepted, for example, it certainly needs timing benchmarks.
My only comment is that it would be a shame to have duplicate functionality in the System and Chrono libraries - especially for such a seemingly simple utility.
Only today I through together:
template <class Clock> struct stopwatch { typedef typename Clock::duration duration; stopwatch() { m_start = Clock::now(); } duration elapsed() { return Clock::now() - m_start; } void reset() { m_start = Clock::now(); }
private: typename Clock::time_point m_start; };
Is there any reason something like this couldn't be added to Chrono right away (I'm not so bothered by the reporting ability)?
I could add a basic stopwatch quite soon, as there is no reporting. Best, Vicente