From: Brock Peabody (brock.peabody_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-18 15:23:54
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> On Behalf Of Peter Petrov
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 2:55 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] asio networking proposal
> Caleb Epstein wrote:
> > Reading back through my comments (below), I don't think any of the
> > Missing Features is a show-stopper. I'd say rationalizing
> > for inclusion in Boost (e.g. perhaps using boost::xtime instead of
> > asio::time, etc) and expanding the documentation and example code
> > would be the top priority. All IMHO of course.
> >>* The asio::time class should probably not be included, and
> >> wherever it's used replaced by Boost.Date-Time.
> > I think boost::xtime is the right choice there.
> Am I the only one who dislikes boost::xtime? IMO it makes much more
> sense to replace boost::xtime with a convenient class like asio::time.
I don't like it either, but what's wrong with Boost.Date-Time? As the
documentation for xtime says: "This is a temporary solution that will be
replaced by a more robust time library once available in Boost."
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk