Re: [Gnash-commit] gnash ChangeLog gui/NullGui.cpp

[zou lunkai]

> I don't understand why it's so important not to depend on boost_date_time. It

Might not be a big deal,  I just have no problems to compile tu_timer
related stuff, but I do have problems to work with boost_date_time.

> The problem with tu_ was initially knowledge. I tought it was best to
> use existing *standard* or de-facto standard classes rather then custom
> ones, in particular to help a team of developers with a good documentation
> and more peer-reviewd implementations of common algorithms.
> I haven't seen the timer one, but that's a single function and I don't
> have any big problem with it. If boost provides an equivalent function
> "for free" (ie: not increasing deps) that's fine too for me.

> Again: it's not the names, it's the lack of classes documentation, proper
> copy constructors or assignment operators and so on... it's usually not-clean
> code in general. And yes, I confirm we never discussed timers in particular
> till now.

I'd say tu_timer is clear and simple enough and with enough commentary
there.  "lack of classes documentation" is unfair this time:)

I just give my vote for tu_timer against boost_date_time, it makes my
programming easier at the moment.