Re: [boost] [partly OT] Re: [review queue] What to do about the library review queue?

Subject: Re: [boost] [partly OT] Re: [review queue] What to do about the library review queue?
From: Vicente J. Botet Escriba (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-23 18:27:52

Le 17/03/2017 à 10:18, Oswin Krause a écrit :
>
>> Could you explain what is the problem having to use also Boost.Chrono?
> Let me answer your question with another question: What good is it to 
> force boost.chrono on the user? If my application does not profit from 
> using boost::chrono over std::chrono why should i have to use it?
>
Well, don't use it then. Who is forcing you to use Boost.Chrono?
> Here is how i see it:
> std::chrono
> + fully described by the standard and supported by all major c++ 
> environments
> + described in all online standard references for c++
> + we can soon expect all newcomers to know about std::chrono
> + can be used without adding another dependency on an external library
>
> boost::chrono
> + larger functionality
> + very similar, but not the same as std::chrono
A report on any difference is welcome. I'm not saying that there are not.
>
>
> mixing both:
> + converting between time points?
I've not think about this, but a patch is welcome.
> + differences in time measured /different clocks?
Chrono library doesn't specify how to convert between clocks. Neither 
std nor boost. Could you clarify your concern?
> + why should there be two very similar libraries mixed in the same code?
>
>
I suspect that because you have some parts of your code that use 
Boost.Chrono because std::chrono is not available.However you have other 
parts that can use std::chrono. In this case, I would suspect that for 
the parts that interact you will use Boost.Chrono.

Best,

Vicente