Re: [boost] A meta-proposal for logging

From: JD (jean.daniel.michaud_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-04 16:05:01

> I see. I guess now I'm beginning to understand what channels are meant
> for. The channel appears to be yet another attribute which defines the
> "class" of the log record (i.e. an access log, debug trace, etc.).
> 

Actually yes, let's put it this way.

> Seems to me we have to fix the set of mandatory attributes that every
> log record should always have and leave space for optional attributes
> (channels go here). I see these attributes as mandatory:
> - record number (increments for each record collected)
> - record date and time
> - thread name (if not set - thread id)
> - scope stack
> - severity level
> - message text
> 
> As for optional attributes I think, it's better to leave them on
> user's behalf since it's too difficult to figure out the correct set
> of them and implement suitable interface to operate them in the
> unified and convenient way. But, surely, the library should leave an
> easy way to implement them.
> 

- filename
- line number
- process name

If not mandatory, can at least be implemented by default in the library.

JD