[boost] Review - boost::log

Subject: [boost] Review - boost::log
From: Tom Brinkman (reportbase2007_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-13 23:21:08

Should boost log  be accepted into the boost library?

My vote is no.

This library will just reinforce boost's reputation as being a repository of
needlessly complicated highly templatized libraries for relatively easy
programming tasks.

I don't mind this added complexity when it comes to genuinely difficult
problem
spaces.  In my view, however, logging is not one of those problem spaces.

Logging is one of those things that if it takes longer than
10 minutes to read the documentation and get up to speed, it will not
get used.

What is your evaluation of the design?

Very much in the spirit of a typical boost library.

However, it has very little attention to "C" interfaces and makes
heavy use of templates.

I suppose because this is boost, that that is acceptable.  However,
boost and the c++ community at large should start moving towards a
more friendly attitude
towards a "C" style api for utility libraries.

Most non-boost c++ developers will dismiss this library out of hand,
not because its a bad
library, its not, it's just more of the same.  Heavy handed use of
templates.

I guess I've spent too much time over the last 5 years ripping out
poorly conceived heavily
templated code.   The thought of adding to this madness, with another
utility library that is burdened
by templates is hard to swallow.

What is your evaluation of the documentation?

Good

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

Logging is useful.  Yes.

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

Yes.  GCC++.  No problems

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

2 hours

Are you knowledgeable about the problem domain?

Yes.

I was the review wizard for three years and
have followed the progression of boost from the beginning,

Tom Brinkman