std.experimental.logger formal review round 3

[Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 29 October 2014 at 23:11:44 UTC, Robert burner 
Schadek wrote:
> That can actually be added to the current state of std.logger 
> without breaking any api.

Just a few additions to handle LoggerCT (which needs a better 
name).

> Anyway IMO your approach presented here and my approach can go 
> hand in hang. Yours should be propagated as the idiomatic way 
> and if you really need the crowbar, which you need sometimes, 
> use StdLoggerDisableXXXXX.

Yes, that would work for me.
It's just important to control logging on a per library basis.