Re: [boost] Re: Re: Profiling Library suggestion

From: christopher diggins (cdiggins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-05 10:26:11

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hartmut Kaiser" <hartmutkaiser_at_[hidden]>
>>
>> One thing that concerns me is that as far as statistics go,
>> this will likely have far too coarsely grained resolution to
>> be used, as one would a real profiler. Due to the resolution
>> of the underlying boost::timer. This is instead useful only
>> for large and extremely CPU intensive blocks of code.
>
> I have a boost::timer interface compatible high resolution timer here, 
> which
> I can submit, if anybody is interested.
>
> Regards Hartmut

I am most definitely interested, and I am quite sure the others who have 
already expressed interest in the profiler library would be as well. Would 
it be appropriate as the default polciy timer for the library, or would it 
be more appropriate as part of the examples? How high is the resolution, and 
what platforms does it work on?

A general question w.r.t platform dependencies, what is the standard way to 
proceed when authouring a boost library which varies on the platform? For 
instance is the following acceptable for Boost:

#ifdef BOOST_WINDOWS
  typdef win32_profiler_policy default_profiler_policy;
#elif BOOST_POSIX
  typdef posix_profiler_policy default_profiler_policy;
#else
  typdef boost_default_profiler_policy default_profiler_policy;
#endif

?

Christopher Diggins
Object Oriented Template Library (OOTL)
http://www.ootl.org