Early review of std.logger

Vladimir Panteleev vladimir at thecybershadow.net
Mon Oct 14 05:42:05 PDT 2013


On Monday, 14 October 2013 at 11:39:52 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> As `std.logger` is still marked as "work in progress" this 
> thread is less formal that typical pre-voting review. Goal is 
> to provide as much input about desirable `std.logger` 
> functionality and current state and let module author to use 
> this information for preparing proposal for actual review / 
> voting.

Would be nice if either FileLogger, or a "proxy" logger available 
to users, would add timestamps. Timestamps are very useful for 
log files, as they allow to correlate logged events with other 
events on the system (e.g. other applications' log files or file 
modification times), so I think they should be there by default.

My personal preference of timestamp format is "[YYYY-MM-DD 
HH:MM:SS.FFF] " (though it needs to be either UTC or additionally 
specify the timezone, to disambiguate overlapping local time when 
DST ends).


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list