std.experimental.logger: practical observations

[Robert burner Schadek via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 11 September 2014 at 16:55:32 UTC, Marco Leise wrote:
> So I've implemented my first logger based on the abstract
> logger class, (colorize stderr, convert strings to system
> locale for POSIX terminals and wstring on Windows consoles).
>
> 1. Yes, logging is slower than stderr.writeln("Hello, world!");
>    It is a logging framework with timestamps, runtime
>    reconfiguration, formatting etc. One has to accept that. :p

what he said

>
> 2. I noticed that as my logger implementation grew more complex
>    and used functionality from other modules I wrote, that if
>    these used logging as well I'd easily end up in a recursive
>    logging situation.
>
>    Can recursion checks be added somewhere
>    before .writeLogMsg()?

I think I don't follow. Just to clear

foo() {
     log(); bar();
}

bar() {
     log(); foo();
}

?

>
> 3. Exceptions and loggin don't mix.
>    Logging functions expect the file and line to be the one
>    where the logging function is placed. When I work with C
>    functions I tend to call them through a template that will
>    check the error return code. See:
>    http://dlang.org/phobos/std_exception.html#.errnoEnforce
>    Such templates pick up file and line numbers from where
>    they are instantiated and pass them on to the exception
>    ctor as runtime values.
>    Now when I use error(), I see no way to pass it runtime
>    file and line variables to make the log file reflect the
>    actual file and line where the error occured, instead of
>    some line in the template or where ever I caught the
>    exception.
>    Not all errors/exceptions are fatal and we might just want
>    to log an exception and continue with execution.

hm, I think adding template function as requested by dicebot 
would solve that problem, as it would take line and friends as 
function parameters