Re: [boost] Review of Logging library begins today February 4th

From: Bruce Sharpe (bruce.sharpe_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-02-09 19:59:08

I am a user of many Boost libraries and far from a C++ guru, so my
comments are from that perspective.

* What is your evaluation of the design?

It is very flexible, it is easy to modify one's usage of it and not
too hard to use.  It has been very useful for me.

* What is your evaluation of the implementation?

It generates some compiler warnings that should be eliminated.  Other
than that, I have not run into any serious issues.

* What is your evaluation of the documentation?

It is quite thorough.  It takes a little more digging than ideal to
get started right out of the box.  That is just a question of
organization, all the necessary content seems to be there.

* What is your evaluation of the potential usefulness of the library?

I needed exactly this functionality, which is quite fundamental to
many kinds of application development.  I looked first to Boost for a
library and was somewhat surprised not to find one.  I was very glad
to be able to be able to use the pre-Boost version.

* Did you try to use the library? With what compiler? Did you have any
problems?

I have used both v1 and v2 of the library with Visual C++ Express 2005
on Windows and gcc 4.0.1 on OS X.  Other than the compiler warnings
mentioned above, no problems.

* How much effort did you put into your evaluation? A glance? A quick
reading? In-depth study?

I would describe myself as a light user of the library.  I have used
it for a single logger with multiple levels and multiple destinations,
probably a very common use case.

* Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

No, other than knowing roughly what I wanted.  My logging in the past
has been done via home-grown ad hoc techniques.

* Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost library?

Yes.

Bruce Sharpe