From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-25 20:26:34
Beman Dawes wrote:
> Jeff Garland wrote:
>> Beman Dawes wrote:
>> Anyway, once you have a version that compiles on Linux I can take a
>> shot at replacing this and seeing what happens...
> That would be great! The refreshed .zip should work for Linux; if not
> let me know.
I've uploaded a quickly done version using date-time types to the vault under
I mostly did the minimal set of changes, but if I was doing a complete job I
would want to change some of the implementation. For example, I wouldn't want
to handle an error in the call to the clock by setting the elapsed to -1.
Also, I'd probably redo the interfaces all in terms of time_duration and then
use milliseconds when I know the time base is actually in terms of
milliseconds (I did that sortof half way). As for i/o, I just did the
expedient thing and used the operator<< for time duration which prints in the
Oh and I didn't even mess with the windows side of things. I'm out of time for
now, but hopefully this will provide some food for thought and discussion.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk