Re: [boost] [log] Comments

Subject: Re: [boost] [log] Comments
From: Roland Bock (rbock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-15 15:07:57

Vladimir Prus wrote:
> First, it seems to me that if two major projects use component/severity scheme,
> then presumably it's of general utility. Second, in the thread you have
> mentioned, you yourself provide example solution that are far from trivial.
> Maybe I'm missing something? In essence, I would like to have:
>
> 	magic_logger lg;
> 	DO_MAGIC(lg, "my_component", debug) << "hi there";
>
> Could you show what will it take?
>   
We are using component/severity, too. I decided to interpret the channel 
as component. Some sample code is attached to my review:

http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2010/03/162902.php

After some preparation in the init function, developers can do the 
following:

    src::severity_channel_logger<severity_level> lg1(keywords::channel = "FirstComponent");

    BOOST_LOG_SEV(lg1, trace) << "A trace severity message";
    BOOST_LOG_SEV(lg1, debug) << "A debug severity message";

I plan to hide most of the  first line in a typedef and a convenience 
function.

> I saw that -- my point is that *default* behaviour should be to go on no
> matter what is wrong. 
>   
I second that (and, if that were is possible in English, I'd third and 
forth that). Logging must not fail until the machine crumbles to dust.

Especially: No message must be lost.

I know that is not really possible, but providing a very high level of 
certainty that messages do not get lost is of extreme importance.