C++: Boost.Asio Timer vs std::chrono

What are the main differences between Boost.Asio Timer and std::chrono in C++?

Boost.Asio Timer is part of the Boost.Asio library, designed for asynchronous I/O operations, while std::chrono is part of the C++ standard library for time manipulation. Boost.Asio Timer is more suited for asynchronous tasks, whereas std::chrono is used for measuring time intervals.

Can you give an example of how to use both timers?

Sure! For Boost.Asio Timer, you would typically set it up with an io_context and a callback function. For std::chrono, you might use std::this_thread::sleep_for to pause execution. Would you like to see code snippets for both?

Yes, please provide the code snippets!

Here's a simple example for Boost.Asio Timer:

boost::asio::io_context io;
boost::asio::steady_timer timer(io, std::chrono::seconds(1));
timer.async_wait([](const boost::system::error_code&){ std::cout << "Timer expired!"; });
io.run();

And for std::chrono:

std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::seconds(1));
std::cout << "Timer expired!";

Which one is better for high-performance applications?

For high-performance applications, Boost.Asio Timer is generally better due to its asynchronous capabilities, allowing for non-blocking operations. std::chrono is simpler but can block the thread, which may not be ideal for performance-sensitive applications.