Subject: Re: [boost] [chrono/date] Performance goals and design summary
From: Howard Hinnant (howard.hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-05-04 11:02:53
On May 4, 2013, at 9:56 AM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 5. I'm not sure the date YMD class doesn't include meta data (Howard
> could you clarify your point here)
I've left that question open. However if I had to make a decision today, I would say definitely not. That aspect of my 2011 paper was almost universally disliked. There are more ways to explore for getting the same or similar functionality. Or simply dropping that functionality is a consideration.
> * *Do we need to make the separation between absolute and relative
> dates?* IMO, yes. While relative dates are powerful they incur on
> unwanted overhead when absolute dates are needed.
I can guess what you mean by relative and absolute dates, but I'd rather not. Can you briefly describe what these types of dates are?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk