Review: std.logger

[Xavier Bigand via Digitalmars-d]

Le 11/07/2014 16:36, Dicebot a écrit :
> Round of a formal review before proceeding to voting. Subject for Phobos
> inclusion : http://wiki.dlang.org/Review/std.logger authored by Robert
> Schadek.
>
> Code:
>      https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/1500
> Documentation:
> http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_core.html
> http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_stdiologger.html
>
> http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_filelogger.html
> http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_multilogger.html
>
> http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_nulllogger.html
> http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_logger_templatelogger.html
>
> DUB package:
>      http://code.dlang.org/packages/logger
>
> Previous discussion thread:
> http://forum.dlang.org/post/mailman.313.1377180809.1719.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com
>
>
> ======================================================================
>
> Summary of changes since last discussion (by Robert):
>
>
> * logger is now a package of multiple files
> * a lot more documentation
> * log and logf now behave as their write and writef counterparts
> * for logging with an explicit LogLevel call logl loglf
> * for logging with an explicit condition call logc logcf
> * for logging with an explicit LogLevel and explicit condition call
> loglc loglcf
> * the log function with an explicit LogLevel like info, warning, ... can
> be extended into c, f or cf and therefore require a condition and/or are
> printf functions
> * unittest have been updated
> * dub package for easy testing
>
> ======================================================================
>
> This is one of long sanding Phobos candidates Robert has put some great
> effort into. As far as I know it is already used in several D projects
> and it is a good moment to make it official.
>
> Review goals, as usual : verify that API is robust enough to build more
> complicated logging systems on top of it, verify Phobos style
> compatibility, check if provided documentation is complete and friendly
> enough.
>
> Base for review process is defined by http://wiki.dlang.org/Review/Process

In the documentation you tell about informations added by the module 
(filename, linenumber,...) but you don't put sample of the resulting output.
IMO it's important to provide a standard format of the output then D's 
IDE would be able to parse it to create links to the code or colorize it,...

Does the output contain a message counter? This help to distinguish 
message duplicates, on some console when prints are fast we don't see 
lines added if their are all the same.

Is it too late for an integration in std.expirimental with dmd 2.66?