From: JD (jean.daniel.michaud_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-02 12:55:30
Caleb Epstein wrote:
> On 3/31/07, JD <jean.daniel.michaud_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> So here is the question:
>> "Is there any interest in a logging library for boost?"
> Of course there is.
> I see from later emails you've read the discussion surrounding John
> Torjo's submission (some of which was from me). Thanks for taking the
> time to do that. You might also give careful reading to Gennadiy
> Rozental's review of the library, which I believe convinced John to
> retract his submission:
Ouch. Gennadiy is one tough guy... He seems to have very precise idea of
what is a log library, and has apparently developed one. I wonder why
it's still not included into boost!...
> You might also want to look at this message, where I took a brief stab
> at implementing some of the concepts that were raised in the library
> proposal discussion:
Yes, I may have use of this.
> In your example above, you're showing what looks like a 100%
> macro-based interface. I would recommend strongly against this.
> Any logging library should be free-standing and usable without
> *requiring* macros like the above.
Why? I like macros for this particular case. Here again there is a
debate, that is not close to being over...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk