Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Interest in a Boost.Chrono/Date library
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-10-25 18:22:29

On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Vicente J. Botet Escriba <
vicente.botet_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Hi,
> maybe some of you have already see the Howard Hinnant presentation at
> CppCOn2015 [1] about his new data-v2 library [2]. My prototype of
> Boost.Chrono/Date library ([3] ] was based on the Howard original library,
> but when we want to reach the maximum of performances we need to use a
> specific date class for each usage. This is what Howard explains in his
> marvelous presentation ans his tiny date library
> My post here wants to know if there is interest in a library providing
> what H.H. date library provides in Boost.
> Note that his data-v2 library yet doesn't provides as much as Boost.Date
> provides but IMHO it is much elegant and efficient. If there is enough
> interest, I will request you to do a first review of the H.H. Date-V2
> library.
> Then once we have a consensus I will make my POC Chrono/Date library ready
> for review.

I had the pleasure of seeing Howard's presentation at CppCon, and it made a
very favorable impression.

Starting about 33:55 in, Howard does a comparison of several libraries,
including Boost Date-Time V1, and Jeff Garland's Boost Date-Time V2. If you
don't want to watch the whole presentation, at least watch the
"Inter-Library Comparison" segment.

> H.H. Date-V2 is under MIT license, which IIRC is compatible with the Boost
> license. I don't know yet if would need to add this license, as my POC [3]
> is already a good starting point, nevertheless, I would like to know if
> there could be any issues about having the source under both licenses.
> We should ask Tony Sebro of the Software Freedom Conservancy. He is
Boost's lawyer, and is very knowledgeable about open source licensing


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at