loglite - A logging library

[JD-23]

Hello,

  It's been a while since a discussion about logging hasn't ran on the
boost mailing list.
  I have a small logging library implementing some of the requirements
that were previously deemed desirable during the discussion we had here
a couple of years ago.

  Find it here : http://code.google.com/p/loglite/

  I've removed all mention to boost in the code, cause I've made some
design choice that wouldn't fit with the boost philosophy.

  Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.

  An example :

[example removed because of the now infamous anti-top-posting gmane feature]

Regards,

JD


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Emil Dotchevski-3]

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 3:08 PM, JD <jean.daniel.michaud@...> wrote:

>
> Hello,
>
>  It's been a while since a discussion about logging hasn't ran on the
> boost mailing list.
>  I have a small logging library implementing some of the requirements
> that were previously deemed desirable during the discussion we had here
> a couple of years ago.
>
>  Find it here : http://code.google.com/p/loglite/

The documentation link is not working for me?

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

2009/10/27 JD <jean.daniel.michaud@...>:

>  Find it here : http://code.google.com/p/loglite/
[..]
>  Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.

There are no templates provided, so it would be nice to have it
separated into a source and a header file.  To get it optionally
header only, the header file could #include the source file, if an
certain PP symbol is defined.

Regards,
 -- Maik
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Ruediger Berlich-2]

JD wrote:
>   Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.

the SF page currently lists loglite as being covered by the LGPL, while some
source files I looked at are under the Boost license. Is all of loglite
under the Boost license ?

Best Regards,
Ruediger


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[JD-23]

On Oct 27, 11:59 pm, Emil Dotchevski <emildotchev...@...> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 3:08 PM, JD <jean.daniel.mich...@...> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
>
> >  It's been a while since a discussion about logging hasn't ran on the
> > boost mailing list.
> >  I have a small logging library implementing some of the requirements
> > that were previously deemed desirable during the discussion we had here
> > a couple of years ago.
>
> >  Find it here :http://code.google.com/p/loglite/
>
> The documentation link is not working for me?
>

Fixed.
Thanks.

JD
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[JD-23]

On Oct 28, 1:27 am, Maik Beckmann <beckmann.m...@...>
wrote:

> 2009/10/27 JD <jean.daniel.mich...@...>:
>
>
>
> >  Find it here :http://code.google.com/p/loglite/
> [..]
> >  Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.
>
> There are no templates provided, so it would be nice to have it
> separated into a source and a header file.  To get it optionally
> header only, the header file could #include the source file, if an
> certain PP symbol is defined.
>

Good point.
I'll do something about that ASAP.

Thanks for your comment.

JD
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[JD-23]

On Oct 28, 5:51 pm, Ruediger Berlich <ruediger.berl...@...>
wrote:
> JD wrote:
> >   Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.
>
> the SF page currently lists loglite as being covered by the LGPL, while some
> source files I looked at are under the Boost license. Is all of loglite
> under the Boost license ?
>

I haven't spend much time thinking about this but the story is, I
wrote the library initially for boost and chose the boost license.
When I checked in the code on googecode, the boost license was not
available in the list.
I wonder which one is more permissive.

JD
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Emil Dotchevski-3]

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:14 PM, JD <jean.daniel.michaud@...> wrote:
>> >  It's been a while since a discussion about logging hasn't ran on the
>> > boost mailing list.
>> >  I have a small logging library implementing some of the requirements
>> > that were previously deemed desirable during the discussion we had here
>> > a couple of years ago.

What is the rationale for attaching semantics to messages (log,
warning, error, etc.)? I'm assuming the logging library isn't going to
take action -- such as terminate the program in case of a fatal error
-- so why not just define severity level?

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[OvermindDL1]

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:17 PM, JD <jean.daniel.michaud@...> wrote:

>
>
> On Oct 28, 5:51 pm, Ruediger Berlich <ruediger.berl...@...>
> wrote:
>> JD wrote:
>> >   Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.
>>
>> the SF page currently lists loglite as being covered by the LGPL, while some
>> source files I looked at are under the Boost license. Is all of loglite
>> under the Boost license ?
>>
>
> I haven't spend much time thinking about this but the story is, I
> wrote the library initially for boost and chose the boost license.
> When I checked in the code on googecode, the boost license was not
> available in the list.
> I wonder which one is more permissive.

The Boost license by far.

LGPL is still not usable by most corporate entities.
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Edd Dawson-3]

Hi JD,

You might like to look at a similar library:
http://bitbucket.org/edd/blah/wiki/Home

I can't comment on whether if fulfils any of the requirements identified on this
list as I built it as something to quickly scratch an itch. But it's
nevertheless very flexible and has met my needs quite comfortably so far.

Kind regards,

Edd

JD wrote:

> Hello,
>
>   It's been a while since a discussion about logging hasn't ran on the
> boost mailing list.
>   I have a small logging library implementing some of the requirements
> that were previously deemed desirable during the discussion we had here
> a couple of years ago.
>
>   Find it here : http://code.google.com/p/loglite/
>
>   I've removed all mention to boost in the code, cause I've made some
> design choice that wouldn't fit with the boost philosophy.
>
>   Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.
>
>   An example :
>
> [example removed because of the now infamous anti-top-posting gmane feature]
>
> Regards,
>
> JD

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[JD-23]

On Oct 28, 9:51 pm, Emil Dotchevski <emildotchev...@...> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:14 PM, JD <jean.daniel.mich...@...> wrote:
> >> >  It's been a while since a discussion about logging hasn't ran on the
> >> > boost mailing list.
> >> >  I have a small logging library implementing some of the requirements
> >> > that were previously deemed desirable during the discussion we had here
> >> > a couple of years ago.
>
> What is the rationale for attaching semantics to messages (log,
> warning, error, etc.)? I'm assuming the logging library isn't going to
> take action -- such as terminate the program in case of a fatal error
> -- so why not just define severity level?
>

I'm using semantics to satisfy the 2 requirements below :
7. Configurable log message attributes
9. Filtering support

from the draft document written some time ago :
http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?Boost.Logging

Now, on the practical side, it helps route the traces differently for
each sink. You would have all the logs in a file, but only the errors
on the standard output. And that's different from the log level, that
define the amount of log you want depending on the compilation
configuration (debug/release).

JD
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[JD-23]

On Oct 29, 2:04 am, OvermindDL1 <overmind...@...> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:17 PM, JD <jean.daniel.mich...@...> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 28, 5:51 pm, Ruediger Berlich <ruediger.berl...@...>
> > wrote:
> >> JD wrote:
> >> >   Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.
>
> >> the SF page currently lists loglite as being covered by the LGPL, while some
> >> source files I looked at are under the Boost license. Is all of loglite
> >> under the Boost license ?
>
> > I haven't spend much time thinking about this but the story is, I
> > wrote the library initially for boost and chose the boost license.
> > When I checked in the code on googecode, the boost license was not
> > available in the list.
> > I wonder which one is more permissive.
>
> The Boost license by far.
>
> LGPL is still not usable by most corporate entities.

The boost license is still not available on google code.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I though the LGPL was exactly made for
that. The use of open source project in a commercial environment.
But I'm open for counseling on that point, licensing is really not so
important to me, as long as people doesn't claim ownership on the
library ...

JD
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[JD-23]

On Oct 29, 7:44 am, "Tan, Tom (Shanghai)" <T...@...> wrote:

> >  Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.
>
> The first thing I notice is that it does not support std::wstring
> directly. It's a big problem in my case I use wide-character in all my
> applications, which simplifies dealing with UTF-16 adopted by Modern
> Windows platforms.
>
> If I need to any string info from my program, I'll have to convert from
> UTF16(represented as std::wstring) to UTF8 so that it could be working
> well with LOGLITE. That's inconvenient.
>
> Offtopic, I am expecting boost::filesystem V3 for this very same reason.
>

I'll have a look into that (Issue 23), thanks for the tip.

JD
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[Emil Dotchevski-3]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:19 AM, JD <jean.daniel.michaud@...> wrote:

> On Oct 28, 9:51 pm, Emil Dotchevski <emildotchev...@...> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:14 PM, JD <jean.daniel.mich...@...> wrote:
>> >> >  It's been a while since a discussion about logging hasn't ran on the
>> >> > boost mailing list.
>> >> >  I have a small logging library implementing some of the requirements
>> >> > that were previously deemed desirable during the discussion we had here
>> >> > a couple of years ago.
>>
>> What is the rationale for attaching semantics to messages (log,
>> warning, error, etc.)? I'm assuming the logging library isn't going to
>> take action -- such as terminate the program in case of a fatal error
>> -- so why not just define severity level?
>>
>
> I'm using semantics to satisfy the 2 requirements below :
> 7. Configurable log message attributes
> 9. Filtering support

Unless there is a use case for non-exclusive semantics (like needing
to classify a logged message as both error and warning), I think it
would be simpler to use different targets for messages depending on
whether they are a warning or an error:

WARN << "A warning";
ERR << "An error";

(sort of like std::cout vs. std::cerr)

Emil Dotchevski
Reverge Studios, Inc.
http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost

[rodrigue pons]

2009/10/27 JD <jean.daniel.michaud@...>:

> Hello,
>
>  It's been a while since a discussion about logging hasn't ran on the
> boost mailing list.
>  I have a small logging library implementing some of the requirements
> that were previously deemed desirable during the discussion we had here
> a couple of years ago.
>
>  Find it here : http://code.google.com/p/loglite/
>
>  I've removed all mention to boost in the code, cause I've made some
> design choice that wouldn't fit with the boost philosophy.
>
>  Please have a look and let me know what you think could be improved.

Hello,

what about multi-threading issues?
I didn´t find anything about this.

R.P.
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost