Re: [boost] [ratio] Mini-review of the proposed ratio library

Subject: Re: [boost] [ratio] Mini-review of the proposed ratio library
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-01 15:40:06

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Howard Hinnant" <howard.hinnant_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [ratio] Mini-review of the proposed ratio library

> On Sep 30, 2010, at 9:03 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
> 
>> The reason I'd like a Boost version is that I don't want to have to
>> wait years and years to be able to use <boost/chrono.hpp> and
>> <boost/ratio.hpp> in Boost libraries. I want to be able to use them
>> with the compilers and standard libraries people are using today, not
>> years from now.
> 
> There is one wrinkle.  I've been experimenting with duration I/O, and Vicente has graciously picked that up.  This is not in the C++0X working draft, nor will it be proposed for C++0X ... maybe TR2.  Here is my experiment:
> 
> http://home.roadrunner.com/~hinnant/duration_io/chrono_io.html

 
Thanks Howard for providing these interesting additions with the BSL and accepting that I adapt them to Boost. 

Best,
Vicente