Round of a formal review before proceeding to voting. Subject for Phobos inclusion : http://wiki.dlang.org/Review/std.logger authored by Robert Schadek.

Code:
    https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/1500
Documentation:
http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_core.html http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_stdiologger.html http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_filelogger.html http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_multilogger.html http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_nulllogger.html http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_templatelogger.html
DUB package:
    http://code.dlang.org/packages/logger

Previous discussion thread:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/[email protected]

======================================================================

Summary of changes since last discussion (by Robert):


* logger is now a package of multiple files
* a lot more documentation
* log and logf now behave as their write and writef counterparts
* for logging with an explicit LogLevel call logl loglf
* for logging with an explicit condition call logc logcf
* for logging with an explicit LogLevel and explicit condition call
loglc loglcf
* the log function with an explicit LogLevel like info, warning, ... can be extended into c, f or cf and therefore require a condition and/or are
printf functions
* unittest have been updated
* dub package for easy testing

======================================================================

This is one of long sanding Phobos candidates Robert has put some great effort into. As far as I know it is already used in several D projects and it is a good moment to make it official.

Review goals, as usual : verify that API is robust enough to build more complicated logging systems on top of it, verify Phobos style compatibility, check if provided documentation is complete and friendly enough.

Base for review process is defined by http://wiki.dlang.org/Review/Process

Reply via email to