On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:40:20 +0200, Mojmir Svoboda
[...]
In my opinion one of the most important questions is what else can a Boost logging library offer than what we can do today with:
clog << "Logging ...";
As we can easily redirect clog or replace it with another stream object where we can control the buffer there must be some added value? [...]definitely my planned added value is run-time efficiency (with focus multithreaded environment).
The reason why I was mentioning Windows Event Logging and Event Tracing before was that I think a Boost Logging library should somehow support operating-system specific logging standards (or at least make it easy to support them). If a Boost Logging library was just a more efficient implementation of clog, maybe with a built-in mutex for thread-safety, it doesn't really deserve to be called a Boost library? :) For example the idea of a destination concept in John's library is already nice as a destination can be more than a stream (and I think there is even a destination class for syslog in John's code somewhere although I don't see it in the documentation). Boris