Re: LogLevel [was std.experimental.logger formal review round 3]

On Thursday, 4 December 2014 at 12:16:54 UTC, Robert burnerSchadek wrote:

I think D lacks a good std.serialization module


That would be a good point if you did binary logging…

Re: LogLevel [was std.experimental... Vic via Digitalmars-d
Re: LogLevel [was std.experimental... Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
- Re: LogLevel [was std.experim... Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d
- - Re: LogLevel [was std.exp... via Digitalmars-d
  - - Re: LogLevel [was std... Robert burner Schadek via Digitalmars-d
    - - Re: LogLevel [was... via Digitalmars-d
      - Re: LogLevel... Robert burner Schadek via Digitalmars-d
    - Re: LogLevel [was std... Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d
    - - Re: LogLevel [was... via Digitalmars-d
      - Re: LogLevel... Robert burner Schadek via Digitalmars-d
        
        Re: LogL... via Digitalmars-d
  - Re: LogLevel [was std.exp... Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
Re: LogLevel [was std.experimental... Kagamin via Digitalmars-d
- Re: LogLevel [was std.experim... Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d
Re: LogLevel [was std.experimental... Robert burner Schadek via Digitalmars-d
- Re: LogLevel [was std.experim... Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d
- Re: LogLevel [was std.experim... Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d
- - Re: LogLevel [was std.exp... Robert burner Schadek via Digitalmars-d
- Re: LogLevel [was std.experim... Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
- - Re: LogLevel [was std.exp... Robert burner Schadek via Digitalmars-d
Re: LogLevel [was std.experimental... Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d

Reply via email to