On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 20:34:43 -0500, Walter Bright
<[email protected]> wrote:
Ok, I'm going to get flamed for this, but,
I don't get it
I do logging all the time. It's usually customized to the particular
problem I'm trying to solve, so it involves uncommenting the right
printf's and then running it. Voila. Done.
The logging libraries I've seen usually required more time spent
installing the package, getting it to compile, reading the
documentation, finding out it doesn't work, rereading the documentation,
etc., etc., than just putting in a #...@$%^ printf, and Bang, it works, cut
& print.
Even worse, the logging libraries are loaded with a grab bag of trivial
features to try and puff it up into looking impressive. They always
seemed to me to be a solution in search of a problem.
Shields up! what am I missing about this?
Using printf / writeln is perfectly fine, until you start to program in
Windows, where there's no command line to display the text. Here's where I
think a small logging library comes handy. I did a small one that logs to
a file, and a variant that display the log messages to a independent
window.
--
Yao G.
