Early review of std.logger

[Robert Schadek]

On 10/14/2013 11:01 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
> On Monday, 14 October 2013 at 20:49:19 UTC, Robert Schadek wrote:
>>
>> I disagree on having a simple email layer among the default  logger,
>> because I feel that having this "special" logger in would water  the
>> design of the logging module. Maybe you are happy with a simple  string
>> message mail with fixed subject and sender, the next guy will  not. And
>> he will be asking for it and (we || I ) have to tell him, why  the
>> simple
>> one is in and his version is not. I would rather have a minimal
>> std(io|err), file logger version which is pure and easy to mod.
>
> Yes.  The really important thing about getting tools like this into
> the standard library is so libraries can build on the same framework
> that a user application is likely to use.  So now instead of hooking
> differently formatted callbacks into every D library I use so I can
> get log output, I can rely on them logging directly to the standard
> log device.
>
> Different projects will have different specialized logger
> requirements, so trying to find a common back-end seems like a largely
> pointless effort anyway.  Though specialized loggers might be a good
> Dub project...
I think you got, at least, my point ;-)

The Dub part is a good at least from my perspective