On 11/05/2010 06:25 PM, Anthony Williams wrote:
If you feel this is an interesting library, then please submit your review to the developer list (preferably), or to the review manager.
It certainly is an interesting library :-)
Here are some questions you might want to answer in your review:
- What is your evaluation of the design?
Looks good to me
- What is your evaluation of the implementation?
Clean code, good to read.
- What is your evaluation of the documentation?
I am still having some trouble with the documentation. For instance, one of the coolest things about Chrono is the thread_clock, IMO. So I looked for thread_clock in the documentation. After being mentioned in the Description section, the next instance is this section in the tutorial: "How to get the actual CPU milliseconds (or other units?) used by the current thread between end and start?" However, although thread_clock is mentioned in the text, it is not to be found in any code sample. I know that it is easy to use it, but still, a few lines of code proving it would certainly not hurt. The next section mentioning the thread_clock is the reference section. It contains this description: "thread_clock class provides access to the real thread wall-clock, i.e. the real CPU-time clock of the calling thread." Huh? This is confusing at best, I'd say. I hope it measures the CPU-time for the calling thread, but not the wall clock. The wall clock should be the same for all threads.
- What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?
Very useful! For me, the thread_clock is the most relevant part. It allowed me to do rather simple but invaluable performance analysis in a multithreaded pipeline application.
- Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any problems?
I used the previous version in a production scenario. No problems. gcc-4.4.3, Ubuntu 10.4, 64bit
- How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick - reading? In-depth study?
I concentrated on the thread_clock (who would have guessed :-) ). I've been a user of this library for several months now, have contributed patches to the code and given feedback to the documentation. I'd call it a partial in-depth study ;-)
- Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?
Partially, at least
And finally, every review should answer this question:
- Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?
Yes, but the documentation should receive another update. Regards, Roland