Le 27/09/11 15:54, Beman Dawes a écrit :
Version 2 of Boost.Timer is about ready to move to trunk. The original version 1 timers are deprecated, but not changed in any way.
Besides deciding to keep the version 2 timers in Boost.Timer, many suggestions and corrections from the "Boost.Timer replacement" thread have been applied. See http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2011/09/185820.php
The docs can be viewed at http://beman.github.com/timer/
The code is available at https://github.com/Beman/timer
Thanks to all who posted comments, corrections, and suggestions in response to the original posting.
Special thanks to Rob Stewart - many of his suggestions have been incorporated - and to Vicente Botet for his work on Boost.Chrono which now is used to implement much higher resolution for wall-clock time.
While additional comments are always welcome, unless someone comes up with a showstopper I'm planning to move Version 2 to trunk and get on with other projects.
Hi Beman, glad to see that you could make use of Boost.Chrono. I have some remark about the documentation. * The example using boost::timer::cpu_timer; ... nanosecond_type last_checkpoint = 0; cpu_timer checkpoint_timer; // start the timer while (more_transactions) { process_a_transaction(); if (checkpoint_timer.elapsed().user - last_checkpoint> 20*1000000000) { create_checkpoint(); last_checkpoint = checkpoint_timer.elapsed().user; } } seems to not really show the a well use of elapsed. For example the same behavior can be done with Boost.Chrono as follows using boost::chrono; ... process_user_cpu_clock::time_point last_checkpoint = process_user_cpu_clock::now(); while (more_transactions) { process_a_transaction(); if (process_user_cpu_clock::now() - last_checkpoint> seconds(20)) { create_checkpoint(); last_checkpoint = process_user_cpu_clock::now(); } } Note that the comparison is done using duration units. I guess that you should include a more specific example that show the advantage of using a timer. * By the way the user, wall and system fields are not chrono::duration? or why you don't use the chrono::process_cpu_clock that provides wall, user and system clocks at once? * Why does stop returns cpu-times? Why by reference? Why elapsed is not returned by reference? cpu_times elapsed() const noexcept; const cpu_times& stop() noexcept; * I would associate the operations pairwise start/stop and suspend/resume. I guess it would be easier to explain the semantics. Best, Vicente