std.experimental.logger formal review round 3

[Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d]

On 10/24/2014 02:16 PM, Robert burner Schadek wrote:
> On Friday, 24 October 2014 at 11:01:40 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
>> On Sunday, 12 October 2014 at 12:06:44 UTC, Robert burner Schadek wrote:
>>>> What's stopping an interface or class to implement a logging concept?
>>>
>>> Same as last time:
>>> Logger[], Logger without a LogLevel not real useful IMO, (new) no
>>> thread safety by default
>>
>> I don't understand your answer. Do you have a link to your last response.
>
> You can not tell if the Logger will log a message, because you can't
> know its LogLevel. It is not thread safe because the interface can't
> have an implementation. Therefore the default implementation is not
> thread safe.

Well then the concept is that a Logger has some method that returns the 
LogLevel (might be a runtime value). Where is the problem? We use this 
for empty in ranges for example.