On 8/27/10 14:44 PDT, so wrote:
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 04:34:43 +0300, Walter Bright
<[email protected]> wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
At my workplace we're using Google's logging library glog
(http://google-glog.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/doc/glog.html), and the
more I use it, the more I like it. It's simple, to the point, and
effective.
I was thinking it would be great to adapt a similar design into
Phobos. There will be differences such as use of regular argument
lists instead of << etc., but the spirit will be similar. What do you
think?
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?
If D needs a standard logging library, it should but nothing more than...
log_open("filename"); // somewhere at start, if possible hide this as well
log(log_level_here, "doing this :", param0, ", and that", param1...);
dlog(...);
.....
I dislike all lame logging libraries out there, where objects running
around.
Logger::init("filename");
Logger log(...);
log(level etc, ...);
Logger::tini(...);
If one needs a complex logging system, he should find/write one.
Thanks!
Totally with you. My opinion: everything beyond 7 symbols plopped in
std.stdio decays the likelihood of acceptance by half.
Andrei
