On 29/07/2014 5:11 p.m., Dicebot wrote:
(sorry for being a bit late, was distracted)
std.logger proposal by Robert Schadek enters voting period which will
last two weeks starting from now.
Discussion thread :
http://forum.dlang.org/post/[email protected]
This voting will be somewhat different from previous ones because it
will be done with std.experimental in mind. Because of that please reply
with a bit more structured votes:
1) Yes / No for inclusion into std.experimental
At this point please consider if module has functionality you want to
see in standard library in general and if implementation is not
fundamentally broken. This is a simple sanity check.
Yes,
I have not tested it, just for reference sake. But the code design looks
fine. Nicely documented with unittests.
2) Yes / No for inclusion into Phobos in its current state
This is where you should summarize your concerns raised during review if
there are any and make decision if existing API / architecture are
promising enough to be set in stone via Phobos inclusion.
Yes
But might be a good idea to add a Syslog and Windows event viewer
logger(s) support.
3) If you have answered "No" for (2) : list of mandatory changes that
are needed to make you vote "Yes"
4) Any additional comments for author.
Okay 1) update sidebar for phobos docs (atleast I couldn't see link to
modules in there).
2) for std.logger.core defaultLogger please please please add that at
the top of the page of documentation. Or else the very ability to change
the default logger could be lost. It took me a while to find it.
Please separate (3) from (4) in some obvious fashion to make it possible
for author to prioritize of feedback. Please use linked thread for
discussions and only post vote + summary here.
Currently only answer for (1) affects the voting outcome. Other answers
are necessary to eventually prepare std.logger for second voting during
beta period of some future release (for actual inclusion into Phobos).
If you have any comments / proposals about actual voting procedure or
review process please create separate thread.
Go ahead ;)
