Jump to page: 1 2
Thread overview
Time to move logger from experimental to std ?
Nov 29
Basile B.
Nov 29
notna
Nov 29
Nathan S.
Nov 30
Nathan S.
Nov 29
Claude
Nov 30
Basile B.
Dec 01
Claude
Dec 02
Basile B.
November 29
Hello, most of the changes made during the current year to the std.experimental.logger package are related to the cosmetic style. Isn't this a sign showing that the experimentation is achieved ?


Facts:
- There only 4 issues for logger - https://issues.dlang.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=phobos&f0=OP&f1=OP&f2=product&f3=component&f4=alias&f5=short_desc&f7=content&f8=CP&f9=CP&j1=OR&list_id=218035&o2=substring&o3=substring&o4=substring&o5=substring&o6=substring&o7=matches&query_format=advanced&short_desc=logger&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&v2=logger&v3=logger&v4=logger&v5=logger&v6=logger&v7=%22logger%22
- The history, mostly style things: https://github.com/dlang/phobos/commits/master/std/experimental/logger
November 29
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 14:32:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
> Hello, most of the changes made during the current year to the std.experimental.logger package are related to the cosmetic style. Isn't this a sign showing that the experimentation is achieved ?
>
>
> Facts:
> - There only 4 issues for logger - https://issues.dlang.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=phobos&f0=OP&f1=OP&f2=product&f3=component&f4=alias&f5=short_desc&f7=content&f8=CP&f9=CP&j1=OR&list_id=218035&o2=substring&o3=substring&o4=substring&o5=substring&o6=substring&o7=matches&query_format=advanced&short_desc=logger&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&v2=logger&v3=logger&v4=logger&v5=logger&v6=logger&v7=%22logger%22
> - The history, mostly style things: https://github.com/dlang/phobos/commits/master/std/experimental/logger

In the past Andrei remarked that he didn't want to move it from stdx until RCStr was in Phobos. That was a couple of years ago, so his opinion might have change by seeing the slow progress on the DIP1000 front.
November 29
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 14:32:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
> Hello, most of the changes made during the current year to the std.experimental.logger package are related to the cosmetic style. Isn't this a sign showing that the experimentation is achieved ?
>
> [...]

+1
November 29
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 14:32:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
> - There only 4 issues for logger

Considering that one of those issues is that the logger outputs garbage when given a wstring or a dstring, I would not take this as an indication that it's time to "graduate" the logger from experimental.
November 29
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 14:32:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
> Hello, most of the changes made during the current year to the std.experimental.logger package are related to the cosmetic style. Isn't this a sign showing that the experimentation is achieved ?

I tried deriving FileLogger class to implement my own log fomatting. I overrided beginLogMsg, logMsgPart or finishLogMsg, but I could not do anything with it because the handle "file_" is private (so I cannot access it within the derived class).

So I ended up rewriting my own FileLogger deriving directly from Logger and copying most of the Phobos version code, but that's not convenient.

Did I miss anything?
November 29
On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 14:32:54 Basile B. via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Hello, most of the changes made during the current year to the std.experimental.logger package are related to the cosmetic style. Isn't this a sign showing that the experimentation is achieved ?
>
>
> Facts:
> - There only 4 issues for logger -
> https://issues.dlang.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW
> &bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&component=phobos&f0=OP&f1=OP&f2=p
> roduct&f3=component&f4=alias&f5=short_desc&f7=content&f8=CP&f9=CP&j1=OR&li
> st_id=218035&o2=substring&o3=substring&o4=substring&o5=substring&o6=substr
> ing&o7=matches&query_format=advanced&short_desc=logger&short_desc_type=all
> wordssubstr&v2=logger&v3=logger&v4=logger&v5=logger&v6=logger&v7=%22logger
> %22 - The history, mostly style things:
> https://github.com/dlang/phobos/commits/master/std/experimental/logger

It was my understanding that there were still problems with its design that Robert wanted to fix, but I don't know where any of that stands. But certainly, I don't think that it makes sense to push forward with trying to get the logger out of experimental without his feedback.

Personally, I would _really_ like to see https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8687 dealt with so that file and line number can be runtime arguments rather than compile time arguments so that you don't end up with a new template instantiation every time you log something.

- Jonathan M Davis

November 30
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 19:48:44 UTC, Nathan S. wrote:
> Considering that one of those issues is that the logger outputs garbage when given a wstring or a dstring, I would not take this as an indication that it's time to "graduate" the logger from experimental.

That was fixed at dconf17 and merged a couple of days later.

November 30
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 21:14:57 UTC, Claude wrote:
> On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 14:32:54 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
>> Hello, most of the changes made during the current year to the std.experimental.logger package are related to the cosmetic style. Isn't this a sign showing that the experimentation is achieved ?
>
> I tried deriving FileLogger class to implement my own log fomatting. I overrided beginLogMsg, logMsgPart or finishLogMsg, but I could not do anything with it because the handle "file_" is private (so I cannot access it within the derived class).
>
> So I ended up rewriting my own FileLogger deriving directly from Logger and copying most of the Phobos version code, but that's not convenient.
>
> Did I miss anything?

Sorry but yes, i think so, the handle is indirectly accessible with "FileLogger.file.fileno".
November 30
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 21:14:57 UTC, Claude wrote:
> ...
> Did I miss anything?

to write a bugzilla issue about it
November 30
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 21:40:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> It was my understanding that there were still problems with its design that Robert wanted to fix, but I don't know where any of that stands. But certainly, I don't think that it makes sense to push forward with trying to get the logger out of experimental without his feedback.

That is correct, I had the code nearly ready, but then didn't found time create
the PR. Its a api change, but it would make the api safer to log into manually
handled memory, and would reduce the gc pressure. I'll try to squeeze my schedule for time to get this going again.
« First   ‹ Prev
1 2