From: Victor A. Wagner Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-06 01:37:28
At Friday 2004-11-05 02:29, you wrote:
>John Torjo wrote:
>>Finally, have had some time to update the logging lib. Get it from:
>>http://www.torjo.com/ (of course, it comes packed with docs)
>Just a quick thought that came to my mind...
>Did you consider using the syntax 'BOOST_LOG(dbg, "message" << foobar);'
>instead of 'BOOST_LOG(dbg) << "message" << foobar;'?
>While I think the syntax you use looks far nicer, we ususally need the
>ability to be able to compile away the logging calls completely and this
>only can be done with the first form.
a point considered in detail in "Effecient C++" by Bulka & Mayhew
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Victor A. Wagner Jr. http://rudbek.com
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
"There oughta be a law"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk