RE: [boost] Re: high_resolution_timer \ timer feature requestsforBoost.Timer

From: Brian Braatz (brianb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-05 01:41:10

The code I am using was originally developed by Christopher Diggins. His
code allows for use of boost.timer or the high_resolution_timer.

I am currently using the high_resolution timer.

THANK YOU for the suggestion of using the microsec_time_clock.hpp. I did
not know that existed, do you know how does this compare to the
high_resolution timer?

I need to stick to a base release version of boost for production
reasons, do you think this other timer will work inside 1.32?

Thank you very much for your thoughts, I would not have noticed the
microsec if you had not pointed it out to me.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
[mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
> On Behalf Of Caleb Epstein
> Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 8:32 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] Re: high_resolution_timer \ timer feature
> requestsforBoost.Timer
> 
> On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 10:42:16 -0700, Brian Braatz <brianb_at_[hidden]>
wrote:
> 
> > But the Profile LOG (like a trace of what happened) looks like this
> > DEPTH   NAME            TIME
> > 0       FuncA           2 Seconds
> > 1       FuncB           1 Second
> >
> > Does that answer your question, or am I missing something?
> 
> Just a subtle point, but the boost::timer class returns CPU time used
> not elapsed wall-clock time and would return results of ~0.0 for a
> function that just sleep'd for a second or two.
> 
> If what you're looking for is a high-resolution clock, try
> <boost/date_time/microsec_time_clock.hpp> (at least in the latest
> CVS).  If you want performance or profiling information, use
> boost::timer.
> 
> 
> --
> Caleb Epstein
> caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost