From: Pavel Vozenilek (pavel_vozenilek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-04 17:57:21
"christopher diggins" wrote:
[Profiling Library suggestion]
>> How is it better than what boost::timer provide?
> I was unaware of timer's existance, thanks for pointing it out. I had
> searched for "profiling", and "profiler".
> So I just took a look at: http://www.boost.org/libs/timer/timer.htm and I
> would humbly submit that perhaps what is lacking in progress_timer is a
> policy, and the ability to name profiles. I would like then to propose:
> This would have an advantage over progress_timer that library users may
> modify the behaviour of the profiler, without rewriting the class. It can
> also be used with more high-performance timers if the user has one at
> their disposal.
> Any comments or suggestions?
Useful would be to have:
- ability to report data only when certain threshold is reached
- collecting min/max/average statistics where needed
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk