On 9/4/2015 4:13 PM, Oliver Kowalke wrote:
2015-09-04 21:05 GMT+02:00 Agustín K-ballo Bergé <kaballo86@hotmail.com>:
On 9/4/2015 3:46 PM, Nat Goodspeed wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé <kaballo86@hotmail.com> wrote:
I just had a quick look at the future implementation, to see if proper
chrono support (one of the reasons for my previous rejection) was implemented. While `wait_for` depicts the standard signature, it does not seem `wait_until` does.
I want to make it as easy as possible for Oliver to act on people's feedback. Please suggest a specific change?
That would be:
"- Every API involving time point or duration should accept arbitrary clock types, immediately converting to a canonical duration type for internal use."
future<> has an overload for wait_until()
template< typename ClockType > future_status wait_until( typename ClockType::time_point const&) const;
Here is the standard definition of `future::wait_until`: template <class Clock, class Duration> future_status wait_until(chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration> const& abs_time) const; Note how it takes *any* time point, and automatically deduces template arguments. Yours requires explicitly specifying a clock type, and not all possible time points necessarily have a corresponding clock type readily available. Regards, -- Agustín K-ballo Bergé.- http://talesofcpp.fusionfenix.com