Re: [boost] [log] Boost Logging Lib v2, 0.9.3

From: John Torjo (john.groups_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-10-30 13:18:57

Jens Seidel wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 04:06:51PM +0200, John Torjo wrote:
>   
>>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 01:02:26PM +0200, John Torjo wrote:
>>>       
>>>> I've completed a major update of Boost Log:
>>>> http://torjo.com/log2/
>>>>
>>>> Feedback is most welcome!
>>>>         
>>> I tried to compile it but noticed many errors. The attached patch fixes
>>> a few (g++ 4.3 snapshot and g++ 4.1 used for testing).
>>>
>>> You include boost/shmem/shmem_named_shared_object.hpp which I do not
>>> find in Boost trunk and sandbox. Where can I find this file?
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> This was an old library - could be that it's not here anymore - I need 
>> to thoroughly check this - I just ported it from the first version of my 
>> lib.
>> I will look into this at a later time. So for, now, just an #if 0 
>> altogether ;)
>>     
>
> OK.
>
>   
>> I think i solved it ;)
>> I've committed everything to SVN.
>>     
>
> I attached another patch which allows now to properly compile at least
> each header file (independently) of Boost.Log.
>
> I fixed also really many missing includes, maybe you should check now
> for circular dependencies ... (I recommend graphviz tools). Maybe you
> don't have to include all files but can add forward declarations?
>
> In the sample code you include stdafx.h which includes itself tchar.h.
>   
Yes my mistake, sorry - it's already fixed.
>  
>   
>> Note : I've fixed all the issues you found.
>>     
>
> Except one.
>
>   
>> But I don't have gcc 4.1/4.3 
>>     
>
> NO, this is no true! gcc is Open Source otherwise I would not use it, so
> you have access to it! To be honest I really wonder why you seem to use
> a non free system (do you know ReactOS :-?) but OK let's ignore this
> considering that your library is also Open Source :-)
>
> I tested gcc 3.3, 3.4, 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3.
>   
I know it's open source ;) I only have the 3.4.2 version at this time. 
Most likely I'll get more versions in the future.
>   
>> - could you please check that it now compiles fine? Thanks!
>>     
>
> With the new patch it works much better. I still need to test the sample
> code. What's with lib/logging/tests/donot_use? If I really should not
> use it I suggest you remove it otherwise please rename it (I would also
> expect it to be called do_not_use instead of donot_use).
>  
>   
>>          template<class msg_type> void write( const msg_type& msg) {
>>              convert_dest::write(msg, (*m_out) );
>> -            if ( m_out->ftellg() > m_flags.max_size_bytes()) {
>> +        // error: 'struct std::basic_ofstream<char, 
>> std::char_traits<char> >' has no member named 'ftellg'
>>
>> *typo ;) should have been tellg()
>>     
>
> No, tellp as m_out is of type ostream!?
>
>   
Yes, right.
> Be honest, did you really try to compile all your files as well? Since e.g.
> boost/logging/writer/ts_write.hpp contained not the proper namespace I
> wonder whether your compiler is indeed so buggy or you just forgot
> testing some files (which is not a big problem for me as I had some fun
> that's why).
>
>   
I did not compile - the rolling_file is a port from the old version. The 
thing is I don't have time to do everything ;)
It's on my todo list ;)

This is true for ts_write.hpp as well - note that I've implemented it, 
and it's next thing on my todo list - add TLS/test thread-safety.
> Not sure whether I have the time to port my code to use your new lib
> instead of the old one. Let's see.
>
> PS: Nice to see that you are responsive. Other people still ignore
> patches I sent them ...
>   
Thanks ;)

===================================================================
--- boost/logging/format/formatter/defaults.hpp	(Revision 40606)
+++ boost/logging/format/formatter/defaults.hpp	(Arbeitskopie)
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
 #include <boost/logging/detail/fwd.hpp>
 #include <boost/logging/detail/manipulator.hpp>
 #include <boost/logging/format/formatter/time.hpp>
+#include <sstream> // std::basic_ostringstream
 #include <stdio.h>

Why use <sstream> ? I tried to minimize dependencies. In defaults.hpp there's no need for basic_ostringstream.

Note: I've committed all to SVN

Best,
John

-- 
http://John.Torjo.com -- C++ expert
... call me only if you want things done right