"christopher diggins" wrote: [Profiling Library suggestion]
How is it better than what boost::timer provide?
I was unaware of timer's existance, thanks for pointing it out. I had searched for "profiling", and "profiler".
So I just took a look at: http://www.boost.org/libs/timer/timer.htm and I would humbly submit that perhaps what is lacking in progress_timer is a policy, and the ability to name profiles. I would like then to propose:
[snip]
This would have an advantage over progress_timer that library users may modify the behaviour of the profiler, without rewriting the class. It can also be used with more high-performance timers if the user has one at their disposal.
Any comments or suggestions?
Useful would be to have: - ability to report data only when certain threshold is reached - collecting min/max/average statistics where needed /Pavel