Re: [boost] [Review] The review of the Boost.Logging library starts today, November 7th

From: Caleb Epstein (caleb.epstein_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-09 09:07:33

On 11/9/05, John Torjo <john.lists_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>
> > This might be an argument of making the BOOST_LOG* macros work like this
> > then:
> >
> > BOOST_LOG(logger, msg << to << stream)
> >
> > so that the implementation could hold a shared pointer to the logger for
> the
> > lifetime of the call. Just a thought.
>
> I'm not sure how that would help. Could you give an example? Thanks.

Actually I'm not sure that changing the syntax of BOOST_LOG/LOGL would even
be required, based on the way enabled_logger works. It would just involve
enabled_logger holding a boost::shared_ptr<logger> and the log_name()
function that is created by BOOST_DEFINE_LOG returning a shared_ptr and not
a reference.

--
Caleb Epstein
caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com