Re: [boost] A meta-proposal for logging

From: Austin Bingham (abingham_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-09 08:55:34

On 2007-04-05, Scott Woods <scottw_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What requirements are ultimately targeted by this thread? I have had
> a variety of software requirements that I would broadly label as "logging"
> but am unclear as to whether those requirements might be met by
> software arising here, e.g.
> . . .

I started the thread, at least in part, in hopes of determining just what
people were looking for :) As you point out, there seems to be a lot of
ground covered by the domain broadly referred to as "logging", and it may
turn out that no single implementation will ever suffice. If we can 
determine that, then we've really learned something important!

So, to answer your question, the goal of this thread is to determine what
we mean by logging. It's veered into some discussions of implementation
and so forth, but I think that's important. I honestly think that this
kind of open, preliminary discussion is the only way we'll ever come to 
grips with an adequate solution (or set thereof).

So, given what I just said, your post is extremely helpful in that it
lays out several disparate modes of logging. Thanks :)

--
Austin Bingham
Signal & Information Sciences Laboratory
Applied Research Laboratories, University of Texas at Austin
10000 Burnet Rd., Austin, TX 78758
email:  abingham_at_[hidden]
cell:   [phone]
office: [phone]