Boost logo

Boost :

From: Mark Blewett (boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-03-18 18:55:50

At 23:03 18/03/2004, you wrote:

>Rob Stewart wrote:
>>From: "Neal D. Becker" <ndbecker2_at_[hidden]>
>>>John Torjo wrote:
>>>>Neal D. Becker wrote:
>>>>>I notice boost doesn't have a logging library. I have seen several
>>>>>around. Are there any recommendations?
>>>>How about std::ostream ;) ?
>>>>Also, disabling writing to a stream is fairly easy, by setting the
>>>>failbit of a stream object:
>>>>out.setstate( std::ios::failbit); // nothing gets written to this log
>>>>any more
>>>Interesting idea. I would like the overhead of disabled loggers to be
>>>relatively small. Would you think this technique might be useful in that
>>>case? (Of course, relatively small is a relative term).
>>Every insertion and every mf you call on the stream must occur
>>and must check the failbit flag. It would, therefore, have
>>noticeable overhead. Is it a problem? Maybe. You could time an
>>app with the logging compiled away (via preprocessor) and with
>>the failbit set.
>I think it's the wrong approach. In our company we have implemented
>logging through macros which has one very important property: When I write
>LOG_DEBUG( whatever() );
>into my source, then whatever() is only evaluated when the debug-logger is
>active. The macro basically expands to something like this:
>if( Base::hasLogger( LogLevel::DEBUG ) )
> Base::log( whatever(), LogLevel::DEBUG );
>I think this cannot be done without macros as normal function calls
>(including operator<< for streams) need to evaluate their arguments before
>they are called. As the difference in the application execution speed can
>vary by a factor of 1000, this is a very valuable optimization for us. My 2¢.

Personally I think restricting boost to disabling logging on a #define is a
double negative... ie a no no.

It would be fine if boost was just used in developing "packaged" software,
but in the real world where customers buy a big product *and* support, its
very useful to be able to turn debugging on/off at runtime with the
delivered solution.

Having said that the previous post I think that's on the right lines, tho
in the code we use don't hide behind a macro, for example my preferred syntax

if (debug_trace.enabled())
         report(debug_trace, .... ) << "Somethings gone wrong x=" << x;

Very simple to use... you just have to instill into the team that reports
stream operators cost, and you better check if the trace is enabled :o)

I guess you could get the best of both worlds and wrap it up in a macro

#define BOOST_LOG(Trace, ...., Message) \
         if (Trace.enabled()) { report(Trace, .... ) << Message; }

which is kind of getting to something similar to the previous post.


Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (
Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 05/03/2004

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at