Subject: Re: [boost] [log] Review-ready version in the Vault
From: Peter Simons (simons_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-02-12 10:09:15
>> in my humble opinion, platform-independence is one of the key benefits
>> that I'd expect from using a library such as Boost.Log. If your library
>> doesn't provide that, then I would not want to see it included in Boost.
> Such an approach would mean that *every feature* available from a boost
> library would be required to work with all platforms.
I beg to differ. I didn't say anything about "every feature" available
from "every boost library". I was talking purely about syslog support in
Boost.Log. In my humble opinion, the ability to submit log messages to
syslog is important. If the proposed logging library can't do that, then
the library is not particularly useful to me. Other people have
different expectations, so they'll feel differently about this subject.
> In this particular case, syslog support is simply lagniappe from a
> library that solves a whole host of other issues [...].
Apparently you and I have different expectations. For me, all these
other issues are just lagniappe. I don't care much about funky message
formatters, attribute systems, and run-time configurable filters. I
don't need any of that. However, I do need the ability to submit log
messages to an RFC 3164 conforming syslog daemon.
Just my 2 cents,
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk