Re: [boost] bugs in boost progress_timer?

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-04-24 21:00:27

> Boost has become more sophisticated, and we aren't so afraid of 
> libraries that have to use platform API's for implementation.
> 
> IIRC, Jeff Garland has suggested that the timer library be reviewed 
> to see if it should be modified, replaced, or integrated with the 
> date-time library. Probably a good idea, but languishing for lack of 
> time.

Ah yes, the 'lack of time' is always the ironic fact of life
when in comes to adding things to the date-time library :-)

I actually have experimented with a timer interface similar
to boost::timer but with the capability to plug in any 
'clock' type.  The interface will return time_durations 
instead of doubles like the current timer, but otherwise
it would be very similar.  The 'clock' type could make use
of any API, custom hardware, etc.  No promises, but there
is certainly a chance it could be in the next release...

Jeff