> > plugins are, by their nature, fragile. I'm just not sure I like my
> > logging to be fragile.
>
> I'm fairly sure we can make it "safe" to the point that if all logging
> plugins break we log to STDERR at a minimum.
> Log::Dispatch has a plugin architecture, and it seems to me that we
> should just use our own plugin architecture for this.
Log::Dispatch's "plugin architecture" is no more than class
inheritance. (One of the big things we're missing.) I'd hesitate to
even really call what Log::Dispatch does a "plugin architecture".
> (there's nothing stopping you from writing a Log::Dispatch logging
> plugin :-)
Point. :) (But that's not the point!)
> I think we need Ask to mediate on this one though.
He's off skiing right now.
-R (spent the past few hours chasing his tail trying to make IPsec work.)
Footnotes:
[1] Because I like throwing totally worthless garbage benchmarks
around, I'll note that eval { 1OP } is 50% slower than { 1OP }.
