On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 23:56:08 +0200, "Philippe Vaucher" <philippe.vaucher@gmail.com> wrote:
My question is about where to place this new timer class, there were suggestion to remove boost::timer entirely and move it into boost::date_time, if so, where ? as it uses boost::posix_time::ptime as default argument I guessed boost::posix_timer::timer ?
I guess the whole component has to go through a fast track review, at least <http://www.boost.org/more/formal_review_process.htm#Fast-Track> At a first glance there are a couple of points which perplex me, for instance the auto_start/manual_start option. Also, wouldn't an std::clock() based Clock be worth having anyway? AFAICS, only a Win32 Clock is provided. What I've found with some experiments (I was writing a timer template myself) is that though std::clock() has obvious limitations, and though we are probably all waiting for this <http://david.tribble.com/text/c0xtimet.htm> the biggest problem is with those implementations (guess which one(s)? :)) that think it has to yield wall-clock time rather than process time. However for those implementation(s) one might use (guess what?) qpc_clock. It would also be useful to make a quick comparison with an implementation based on GetProcessTimes(), if this hasn't already been discussed. Don't be too formal, just a couple of sentences for us to understand :) -- [ Gennaro Prota, C++ developer for hire ] [ resume: available on request ]