Joachim Faulhaber wrote:
2011/3/15 Vicente Botet <vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr>:
Hoping the proposals are close to the interoperability point. If the separated traits don't satisfy your design, maybe you could define a specific traits that groups all your needed traits.
Thank you for your proposals. This is going in a good direction. And I personally think that the simpler solution, needing less indirections and less customization code may also be considered.
I'm open to any evolution on Boost.Chrono that has a consensus, so I want to hear what others think ;-) In any case all the added functions should be accessible only if BOOST_CHRONO_EXTENSIONS is defined, so semantic compatibility with std::chrono is maintained. Best, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/chrono-Interoperability-with-ICL-and-comm... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.