I like what you've done (code please?). I've added a few functors to John Torjo's logging effort and was actually going to try to put together another release of it since John is quite busy. One thing that has bugged me about the Torjo approach was the requirement for defining the logs in a separate translation unit. I'm not sure I like the idea of having to write code to dump the log messages though. I assume this is a Some important features that the Torjo library (I guess thats what we're calling it) offers that I hope yours also would are thread safety and a highly customizable output format. I believe a convenience interface (almost necessarily macro-based) that takes ostream<< style messages and is also optimized to *not* go as far as actually formatting the log message (or creating a Boost.Format object if thats the route you go) if the message wouldn't be logged (e.g. due to policy, log disabled or too-low a level). This was avidly debated on the list and I think the consensus that this was a must-have feature. I look forward to a reveived Boost.Log discussion. -- Caleb Epstein caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com