Re: Early review of std.logger

[Robert Schadek]

On 10/15/2013 09:32 AM, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
> Am 15.10.2013 09:08, schrieb Jacob Carlborg:
>> On 2013-10-14 23:22, Dicebot wrote:
>>
>>> If we need to care about that, D module system is a failure.
>>> But I don't think it is a valid concern.
>>
>> People already complain about conflict function names in Phobos.
>>
>
> And I'd agree with them. At least inside of a library, care IMO should
> be taken to minimize overlap (of course functionally equivalent ones
> in different overload sets are fine, though). But in case of "logXXX"
> this seems to be very unlikely, much in contrast to "log" (std.math.log).
yes and no. Of course does logXXX create less conflict, but I like to
simply write log and don't care about the LogLevel. So again pros and cons