[boost] boost::timers finalization

From: Philippe Vaucher (philippe.vaucher_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-30 13:38:23

Hello guys,

I finally got time on my hands to battle with quickbook and eventually I got
it working !

So here's the (incomplete) documentation :
http://www.unitedsoft.ch/boost/libs/timers/

And here's the current version of the timers library :

http://www.unitedsoft.ch/boost/boost_timer_2007_30_4.tgz
http://www.unitedsoft.ch/boost/boost_timer_2007_30_4.zip

The documentation is not complete at all, but the main idea is there so I'd
like you to express all the constructive criticism you guys might find about
the library & documentation.

Now I'll raise a couple of questions :

   1. Does any of you have a better idea for the devices/timer names ?
   I'm not very fond of "gstaft_device" to express "GetSystemAsFileTime's
   device" but I can't find a better way. I thought of a
   devices<getsystemtimeasfiletime>::type mpl approach but it doesn't sounds so
   nice either.
   2. I renamed boost::timer to boost::timers because the templated timer
   class should not have the same name as the namespace it lives in, if you
   have another idea for the organisation please share. Like should I make the
   "portable" namespace at all ? If not, should I move the devices/timers in
   that namespace in the boost::timers namespace ?
   3. Does anyone know if std::clock() isn't implemented on "linux" ? On
   the unbuntu and gentoo boxes I tried it keeps returning 0, while on windows
   it works.
   4. Does anyone know what's wrong in my getrusage() or GetThreadTimes()
   usage ? I can't see what's wrong but it also returns 0.
   5. I'm looking to know about the overhead & resolution for all the
   apis used, if you have such informations please tell me :)
   6. Once finalized all this, what's next ? Should I put the whole thing
   in a boost review ?
   7. Should I write unit tests for this library ? I'm afraid it wouldn't
   make a lot of sense...

Thank you !
Philippe