Include line number in boost logs
Hello,
I try to implement that a log entry also logs its line number with
boost::log. If any developer of it reads here, please also consider this a
wishlist item...
I think the best way to add an additional attribute for it
core::get()->add_global_attribute(
"Line", attributes::mutable_constant
I finally got it. Shared the answer on stack overflow: http://stackoverflow.com/a/32200033/3585934 Florian Lindner wrote:
On 25.08.2015 11:15, Florian Lindner wrote:
I finally got it. Shared the answer on stack overflow:
Thank you for sharing this. I'd just recommend to write macro #define's in such a way that they are syntactically and semantically neutral ... using do { .... macro contents ... } while (false) is a good way to achieve this. For instance, this: #define logInfo(methodname, message) do { \ LOG_LOCATION; \ BOOST_LOG_SEV(_log, boost::log::trivial::severity_level::trace) << message \ while (false) would allow constructs such as: if (something) logInfo("my_func", "my message"); which not only would not fail with compilation errors but would behave really strange with your original code. I never used any of my accounts on stackoverflow and can't write a comment there, hence I'm (ab)using an opportunity to comment here. Just a footnote: isn't methodname rather redundant since you already have __func__ in the LOG_LOCATION? Cheers, Leon
Leon Mlakar wrote:
Ah, thanks, that sounds wise. Isn't is sufficient to just use curly braces {...} instead of do{..} while (false)?
I never used any of my accounts on stackoverflow and can't write a comment there, hence I'm (ab)using an opportunity to comment here.
I will update my anwser there.
Just a footnote: isn't methodname rather redundant since you already have __func__ in the LOG_LOCATION?
Haha, you're right. I'm designed the macros as a drop in replacement and using the same API. That's why the methodname is there. Best Regards, Florian
Cheers,
Leon
Leon Mlakar wrote:
I have just discovered that: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_59_0/libs/log/doc/html/boost/log/add_value.h... which seems to do exactly the same without so much code hassle. I wonder why the discoverability of features with boost log is so bad? I was looking for a solution for that standard task to log line numbers for weeks, but never discovered that (and people who wrote all that question postings and answers I read either) The function add_value is not even mentioned in the manual about attributes http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_59_0/libs/log/doc/html/log/detailed/attribut...
participants (2)
-
Florian Lindner -
Leon Mlakar