> You are not going beyond basicConfig - I'd write the above as:
Intentionally didn't go beyond basicConfig. The problem is global
level configuration vs. easy local (in function or in class)
configuration.
> logging.basicConfig(...)
>
> def __init__(self, x):
> self.x = x
> self.log =
En Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:50:52 -0300, Alia Khouri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escribió:
> But I'm not letting the logging module off, it's still not the easiest
> or most intuitive module to work with.
>
> For example: a basic Log class that can be programatically configured
> would be quicker to work wit
On Jul 30, 8:01 am, "Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> To see what's going on, try using this old-fashioned debug technique: a
> few print statements.
My bad, problem was solved, the shortcoming was one of my variables
pointing to nothingness (-;
But I'm not letting the logging mod
En Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:29:58 -0300, Alia Khouri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escribió:
> I've been struggling with the logging module in the stdlib which seems
> to me rather counter-intuitive:
>
> For some reason it refuses to recognize configuration options when
> they are set inside a class so I have
I've been struggling with the logging module in the stdlib which seems
to me rather counter-intuitive:
For some reason it refuses to recognize configuration options when
they are set inside a class so I have had to initialize logging and
set the configuration options in the global scope of my modu
