From: Philippe Vaucher (philippe.vaucher_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-26 05:14:43
> Sorry I haven't got a chance to look at this till now. First, it might be
> nice if you could upload a version to the vault so other people can try it
Ok will do so with the next version that should come very soon.
I think this code is both inefficient and likely non-portable.
Hum, by definition QueryPerformanceCounter is non-portable ?
As I understand it, QueryPerformanceCounter has a hardware defined
> resolution that
> can be queried by calling QueryPerformanceFrequency. QPF provides the
> per second. You should be able to use this to more simply construct the
> time_duration. So, for example, if QPF returned 1000 you could simply say
> m_elapsed +=
> I'm guessing nanoseconds might be the best duration type to use in the
Hum you are probably right, I'm not that much used to date_time so I thought
I had to construct using the constructor but what you just showed is indeed
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk