Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Fiber review January 6-15
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-01-10 12:14:16
Le 10/01/14 08:52, Oliver Kowalke a écrit :
> 2014/1/10 Vicente J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>
>> Don't forget that my point was related to time_points.
> in the case of time_points it is a little bit complicated. algorithm,
> fiber-schdulers and the sync. primitives use steady_clock::time_point.
> I don't see how I could make this flexible so that it would work with all
> kinds of clocks from boost.chrono.
> the only possibility would be to make the member-functions and the classes
> (for instance condition_variable) templates (clock-type as template
> but this would be make the complete code templated and uncomfortable.
maybe it is not simple, but it is possible.
> I thought that using one clock (steady_clock would be preferable) is OK.
Well, is your library, so you decide.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk