On Fri, 2016-04-15 at 19:29 +0200, Alexandre Trufanow wrote: > The changes look good overall, removing the event class makes the > handler's > API much cleaner IMO. > I found the on_unhandled callback very useful for testing/debugging, > when I > didn't know what event to expect for my unit tests. Do you think > there > could be another way of setting a catchall for events?
We considered this when deciding to remove on_unhandled - the problem is that after removing event there was no way to make on_unhandled at all useful. So we'd need some other way to handle this, a possibility would be to add logging to the empty default handlers, which logs that the specific handler hasn't been called but not overridden. As the C++ library has no logging infrastructure at the moment, we'd have to add this first. Note though that in many applications you will expect to call empty handlers a lot, so that logging every unhandled event might be overkill. I agree with Justin that it will be very useful to log the events at source in any case. Andrew --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
