Vicente Botet wrote:
Regarding process_cpu_clock, I have experienced that following code provided on Linux wrong text output, while on Windows was ok: { boost::stopwatches::stopclock<> timer; ... some work }
Could you give me output on both cases?
Consider following code snippet: { boost::stopwatches::stopclock<> boost_timer; for( int i = 0; i < 10000000; i++) sqrt( 123.456L); sleep( 1); // sleep 1s } Text output on windows is: real 1.031s, cpu 0.031s (3.0%), user 0.031s, system 0.000s while thread clock measures: wall=1031ms, cpu=31ms Text output on Android (on Linux was similar) is: real 0.001s, cpu 0.000s (23.2%), user 0.000s, system 0.000s while thread clock measures: wall=1377ms, cpu=312ms Test on Android was around 10x slower because I run it on Android emulator (can not test Linux right now). Behaviour on Linux I saw couple of days ago was same as on Android, i.e., stopclock provided wrong text output, just test was similar fast as on Windows. Hope this helps. BR, Libor -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/chrono-Thread-clock-compatibility-problem... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.