Joachim Faulhaber wrote:
(2) An increment/decrement on the least steppable unit (3) A difference_type declaration
Very simple, very little effort, great benefit for instant interoperability, not only with ICL but with all generic libraries that depend on this minimal set of fundamental information.
Joachim, could you create a ticket for (3). I don't think this is too disruptive. For (2), I will rephrase your least steppable unit as follows. The semantics associated to++,-- is to interpret the unit as the duration of the time_point. Given Atime_point tp; tp++ will be equivalent to tp += Atime_point::duration(1); Howard, do you think that there is a chance this semantics could be accepted for TR2? Best, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/chrono-Interoperability-with-ICL-and-comm... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.