On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:25 AM, finbeu <info_pe...@t-online.de> wrote: > yes, when starting my project, I was looking at the logging library which > resides (resided) in clojure.contrib and I didn't like it at that point in > time. I think because it was trying to do too many things at once. If my use > case can be solved with some small java wrappers, I try to do it on my own.
FWIW: (use 'clojure.tools.logging) (info (range 4)) happily logs (0 1 2 3) - with tools.logging 0.2.3 Sorry to seem to be belaboring the point but the "standard" logging library "just works" and handles lazy sequences without needing any workarounds (unless I'm missing something here?). The reason I'm pushing on this is that it's entirely possible that a contrib library wasn't suitable "back then" but things are moving along pretty well with the modular contrib libraries now and it's helpful - for all of us - for folks to use those, for a number of reasons. It avoids reinventing the wheel. It gets more usage of libraries that we want as robust as possible. If folks don't like the modular contrib libraries, we need the feedback in the form of JIRA tickets so that we can improve them - and open discussion on the lists. -- Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ World Singles, LLC. -- http://worldsingles.com/ "Perfection is the enemy of the good." -- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
