I dont understand the need for the "Proposed Boost logging library". A perfectly good and flexible logging library exists in the form of log4cxx, which is much more flexible than the proposal, has a ton of tools, appenders, is compatible with log4j/log4net etc etc (for those of us who live in multiple worlds). log4cxx is going through a almost complete rewrite, but is still eminently usable. see http://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/ cheers,
Vladimir Prus wrote:
Hi Matthias,
on http://www.torjo.com/ is a "Boost logging library" available for download, but it doesn't exist on the official boost website.
Will this library be in a future release of boost, or has someone just abused the well-known name for pushing his work?
A logging library would be a very nice thing to have in boost, but before I use this one, I want to make sure it will be available publicly in the official boost packages.
This library was not reviewed, and I'm not sure if the review was requested. So, it's "Proposed Boost logging library", and is not an official part of Boost.
- Volodya
In fact, John Torjo has requested a formal review at boost.devel just today, see his post at http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.devel/122414
- Andreas
-- Jwahar Bammi bammi@memento-inc.com
I dont understand the need for the "Proposed Boost logging library". A perfectly good and flexible logging library exists in the form of log4cxx, which is much more flexible than the proposal, has a ton of tools, appenders, is compatible with log4j/log4net etc etc (for those of us who live in multiple worlds). log4cxx is going through a almost complete rewrite, but is still eminently usable. see http://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/
First statement from docs: "Log4cxx is C++ port of Log4j." Which tells me enough to be skeptical about your statements. I did not see single Java -> C++ port that has even something to talk about. Gennadiy
On 4/26/05, Jwahar Bammi
I dont understand the need for the "Proposed Boost logging library". A perfectly good and flexible logging library exists in the form of log4cxx, which is much more flexible than the proposal, has a ton of tools, appenders, is compatible with log4j/log4net etc etc (for those of us who live in multiple worlds). log4cxx is going through a almost complete rewrite, but is still eminently usable. see http://logging.apache.org/log4cxx/
From that web site:
"log4cxx-0.9.7 can be downloaded from http://logging.apache.org/site/binindex.html. At this point, log4cxx-0.9.7 is substantially out of date, has known serious deficiencies that have been resolved in the CVS, and should be avoided for new code" There have been no official releases since 0.9.7, so I'd say that it being "eminently usable" is debateable. I am also of the mind that the various 1:1 ports of log4j to C++ carry too much baggage along with them. -- Caleb Epstein caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com
Jwahar Bammi wrote:
I dont understand the need for the "Proposed Boost logging library". A perfectly good and flexible logging library exists in the form of log4cxx, which is much more flexible than the proposal, has a ton of tools, appenders, is compatible with log4j/log4net etc etc
Then, why don't you take part in formal review, when it happens, and list all the inflexibilities and missing tools/appenders in the proposed library? That's the simplest way to affect things. Or, better yet, you can give that list right now so that it can be discussed before the review. - Volodya
Jwahar Bammi wrote:
I dont understand the need for the "Proposed Boost logging library". A perfectly good and flexible logging library exists in the form of log4cxx
Ignoring any potential problems with log4cxx (I've never used it myself), having a lib as part of boost as opposed to a standalone library carries a lot of benefits. Standardization, quality control, wider user base, accessibility. I'm really looking forward to the day when you only need a C++ compiler and boost, and you get almost all of the functional building blocks you need. All the downloading, configuring, compiling of 3rd party library dependencies is such a major stumbling block for people coming to C++ from other languages such as Java or Perl, which have massive built-in libraries offering most of what people need. AC.
participants (5)
-
Andrew Chapman -
Caleb Epstein -
Gennadiy Rozental -
Jwahar Bammi -
Vladimir Prus