RE: [boost] Proposal: Logging library

From: Terence Wilson (tez_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-09 10:03:39

Why not just provide a derived CLog class that can handle whatever you
want? Printf, streams, XML etc. The point is we should concentrate on
creating an efficient, logical, extensible framework rather than getting
hung up on the details of *what* it can log. I'm happy to opensource my
code, it's far from Boost quality, but I think the approach has some
merit (and works).

-----Original Message-----
From: boost-admin_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-admin_at_[hidden]]
On Behalf Of Markus Schöpflin
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 7:44 AM
To: boost_at_[hidden]
Subject: Re: [boost] Proposal: Logging library

Ernie Makris wrote:

[snip]

> I agree, the format library is definitely a step above ordinary printf

> style format strings. But, using a formatter would not be a hard and 
> fast rule. I think it should be allowed to just say:
>   logger << "foo: " << foo << "bar: " << bar << "baz: " << baz; OR
>   logger << log_format("foo: %1 bar: %2 baz: %3") % foo % bar % baz;
> 

Thats exactly what I was trying to say. :-) Of course log_format() would
have support for timestamps, thread and process ids, errno,
GetLastError()(?) and so on.

Markus
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes:
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost