Std Phobos 2 and logging library?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Zz wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
> 
>> Frank Benoit wrote:
>>> Andrei Alexandrescu schrieb:
>>>> Zz wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there any plans for a logging library in Std Phobos 2.0?
>>>>>
>>>>> Zz
>>>> I wanted to add logging support for a while now but am undecided about
>>>> the API to use. Log4J is quite popular but quite complicated. There are
>>>> a number of simpler APIs out there but I couldn't figure out which is
>>>> the best.
>>>>
>>>> If anyone has ideas and/or code to contribute, that would be great.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>> Why not start with the one from tango?
>> Because it's not my code and every discussion on licensing ends up 
>> confused. What we can do in Phobos is following e.g. the Log4J API, 
>> which as far as I understand Tango implements or at least draws 
>> inspiration from. But then by browsing this group a while ago I figured 
>> that Tango added a Trace module because some people deemed the logging 
>> API too complicated.
>>
>>> Why has everything to be
>>> different?
>> Nobody said it has to be different.
>>
>>> If it really is not important, why do you have to make it
>>> different than tango? Every code that uses tango and phobos, or wants to
>>> support both has to reimplemnent an intermediate abstraction layer.
>> Again, I don't *have* to make it different, but I can't *copy* it 
>> either. There are two other things to consider: (a) Phobos' logging can 
>> take advantage of D2 features; (b) Phobos' logging should be well 
>> integrated with the rest of itself, e.g. it may be odd to have one way 
>> to format things in stdio and an entirely different way in the log, or 
>> to have the logging infrastructure incompatible with the stream 
>> infrastructure.
>>
>> That all being said, I don't see a lot of point in making Phobos' 
>> logging 100% identical with Tango's. Phobos2 and Tango2 will be usable 
>> together, so there's no point in the duplication - if you want Tango's 
>> logging mechanism, you just use it. So there will be no point in 
>> "supporting both" because both can coexist.
>>
>>
>> Andrei
> 
> It would be good to have one that makes use of D2's features have you looked at "simple-log", I'm not a java programmer but I do know some people who seem to like it more than Log4J.
> here is the link https://simple-log.dev.java.net/
> 
> Anyway whatever the API looks like one would be welcome.
> 
> Zz

That looks interesting, thanks for the pointer.

Andrei