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
