[boost] Re: Re: [Q]: What is the recommended logging facility forboost: log4cpp or ??

From: Francis ANDRE (francis.andre_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-22 15:27:31

> John Torjo wrote:
>
> > Francis ANDRE wrote:
> >
> >> I have asked to the owner of log4cpp if he would be interested in
putting
> >> log4cpp in the boost foundry (sandbox first for sure) with a change
from
> >> the LGPL licence to the boost one.
> >>
> >
> > To me, log4cpp seems way too complex and just modeled after the Java
way.
> >
> > Of course, this is just my very subjective oppinion ;)
> >
>
> I agree.
>
>

About complexity, I have no other reference in c++ except in house boring
and tedious package...but using log4cpp was quite simple in term of
integration. So I do not quite agree with the "complexity" argument....

 On the "Java way", I do not matter if the design comes from Java
ofrSmalltalk  or Eiffel  or whatsoever if it does the job!!!.