Re: [boost] A meta-proposal for logging

From: Andrey Semashev (andysem_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-05 12:58:30

Hello JD,

Thursday, April 5, 2007, 12:05:01 AM, you wrote:

>> 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

These should be optional since one have to explicitly set them at each
log record, which obviously may be omitted. We may support them in the
library-provided macros.

> - process name

This might be mandatory, although I'm not sure there's a portable way
to get it without having the command line.

-- 
Best regards,
 Andrey                            mailto:andysem_at_[hidden]