On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 21:05:55 -0500, Beman Dawes wrote
At 03:08 PM 2/10/2005, christopher diggins wrote:
The thing is that boost::timer is not good enough for many non-trivial profiling tasks (and it was discussed here on ML many times). Overflow is >> one of the major issues for example. So without larger time type you >> couldn't get around it's deficiencies. > >It is not a bad idea then to update the timer resolution. However, I find >it strange that the expectations on the Profiler library would be greater >than those placed on the Boost.Timer library.
Jeff Garland and I have discussed replacing the Boost.Timer library by adding a new timer component in the date-time library. The Boost.Timer design isn't how we would tackle the problem today. There is or was a wiki-page discussing some of the issues, but I'm not finding it at the moment.
Sorry I've been busy so I haven't had time to read or chime in on this thread. Bringing timer into date-time has been on the back burner, but I expect to pick it up either before or right after 1.33. The wiki page is at: http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?GDTL/Timer Please add your requirements / thoughts there. Jeff