-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Peter Petrov Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:55 PM To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] asio networking proposal
Caleb Epstein wrote:
Reading back through my comments (below), I don't think any of the Missing Features is a show-stopper. I'd say rationalizing interfaces for inclusion in Boost (e.g. perhaps using boost::xtime instead of asio::time, etc) and expanding the documentation and example code would be the top priority. All IMHO of course. {snip}
* The asio::time class should probably not be included, and wherever it's used replaced by Boost.Date-Time.
I think boost::xtime is the right choice there.
Am I the only one who dislikes boost::xtime? IMO it makes much more sense to replace boost::xtime with a convenient class like asio::time.
I don't like it either, but what's wrong with Boost.Date-Time? As the documentation for xtime says: "This is a temporary solution that will be replaced by a more robust time library once available in Boost."