Re: [boost] Low-level precision timer proposal

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-21 08:53:22

"Silex" <silex0r_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:bfc703c0605210356v38a23f9haccc359223fb7a20_at_mail.gmail.com...

>The goal is that timer_new.hpp is then renamed to timer.hpp and
>replaces the current header.

That's fine with me, assuming documentation is updated as needed.

The other timing related issue that I've procrastinated about for years is 
boost/progress.hpp. Class progress_timer suffers from two problems:

1) Inconsistent results depending on operating system.

2) Doesn't always give enough information for its intended use - timing 
program execution.

Problem (1) will be fixed by your changes to timer, IIUC.

As we speak I'm working on a solution to (2). The intent is to leave 
progress_timer as is, since it does meet some needs, and since there is some 
small amount of existing code that depends on its output format, and add a 
new header, perhaps called process_times.hpp.

It will contain functions and/or classes that reports process wall-clock 
time, kernel-time, and user-time, using Windows GetProcessTimes and POSIX 
times(), etc.

--Beman