std.experimental.logger formal review round 3

[Robert burner Schadek via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 27 October 2014 at 22:20:04 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> On 10/27/2014 01:36 PM, Robert burner Schadek wrote:
>> Well, as far as I can see his argument was based on old code 
>> that has
>> long been rewritten and he hasn't answered since I pointed 
>> that out.
>
> How do come to that insight?

because the code you show as an example:

"cat > lib.d << CODE
version (StdLoggerDisableLogging)
     enum isLoggingActive() = false;
else
     enum isLoggingActive() = true;

void doSome()
{
     import std.stdio;
     writeln("loggingLib: ", isLoggingActive!());
}
CODE"

is different from the code that has been in the PR for quite some 
time. And the code you show does exactly what you say and the 
current code does something different.