On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 14:32:54 Basile B. via Digitalmars-d wrote: > Hello, most of the changes made during the current year to the > std.experimental.logger package are related to the cosmetic > style. Isn't this a sign showing that the experimentation is > achieved ? > > > Facts: > - There only 4 issues for logger - > https://issues.dlang.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW > &bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=phobos&f0=OP&f1=OP&f2=p > roduct&f3=component&f4=alias&f5=short_desc&f7=content&f8=CP&f9=CP&j1=OR&li > st_id=218035&o2=substring&o3=substring&o4=substring&o5=substring&o6=substr > ing&o7=matches&query_format=advanced&short_desc=logger&short_desc_type=all > wordssubstr&v2=logger&v3=logger&v4=logger&v5=logger&v6=logger&v7=%22logger > %22 - The history, mostly style things: > https://github.com/dlang/phobos/commits/master/std/experimental/logger
It was my understanding that there were still problems with its design that Robert wanted to fix, but I don't know where any of that stands. But certainly, I don't think that it makes sense to push forward with trying to get the logger out of experimental without his feedback. Personally, I would _really_ like to see https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8687 dealt with so that file and line number can be runtime arguments rather than compile time arguments so that you don't end up with a new template instantiation every time you log something. - Jonathan M Davis