From: Javier Estrada (jestrada_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-04-09 17:09:09
After reading all the email, I'd like to summarize the aspects that need to
be balanced in such a proposal:
a) Static (ala cin, cout, cerr, clog) ?
a) Singleton ?
- Thread safety
a) Single-threaded ?
b) Multi-thread ?
a) Single target
b) Multiple Targets - What's better? Composition? using a design pattern,
- Optional output information
thread id, process name
- Severity (Levels)
- Reduce runtime impact--to zero if possible.
- Add your own
IMHO, a logging library for boost should follow the streams philosophy and
be based on streams.
"Vladimir Prus" <ghost_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> Ernie Makris wrote:
> > Hello Fellow Boosters,
> > I'd like to propose the design and development of a logging library
> > to be included in boost.
> I think it makes sense to look at
> It already provides logging features. The emphasis is on debugging output,
> but it's definitely worth looking at.
> - Volodya
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk