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

From: Eelis van der Weegen (gmane_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-11-13 16:56:15

John Torjo wrote:
> Eelis van der Weegen wrote:
> 
>>1. What is the fundamental reason that logs cannot be declared/defined with 
>>something as simple as  boost::logging::log mylog ("mylog");
> 
> Note: you can actually do the above: it's called "Scoped Logs"

The existence of scoped logs doesn't really affect my question: Assuming 
that BOOST_DECLARE_LOG/BOOST_DEFINE_LOG have a good reason to exist (for 
example because logger objects cannot be used at namespace level), what is 
the fundamental reason that they have to be macro's? Why can't we get the 
normal non-macro syntax at namespace level without losing functionality?

Regarding string names -- while I do not dispute that some users may have a 
use for a runtime object identification system based on string names or 
other runtime identification values, I am convinced that such systems solve 
a completely different problem that in its core has nothing to do with 
logging. I therefore feel that a logging library should just work with 
normal C++ identifiers, variables, references, iterators, etc. Any nifty 
string mappings (and naming/query schemes) can always be built on top of 
that if needed.

That said, here's my review:

- What is your evaluation of the design?

See above. I feel that one of the library's primary features is misguided, 
and feel that the focus of the library is wrong.

- What is your evaluation of the implementation?

Haven't looked.

- What is your evaluation of the documentation?

Sloppy and unprofessional. Just not up to Boost standards.

- What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?

I have too little experience with logging in general to say.

- Did you try to use the library?  With what compiler?  Did you have any
problems?

Haven't tried.

- How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
reading? In-depth study?

I read the documentation.

- Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

Not particularly. My review shouldn't carry much weight.

- Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?

No.

Regards,

Eelis