22 Oct
2004
22 Oct
'04
8:27 p.m.
John Torjo wrote:
Francis ANDRE wrote:
I have asked to the owner of log4cpp if he would be interested in putting log4cpp in the boost foundry (sandbox first for sure) with a change from the LGPL licence to the boost one.
To me, log4cpp seems way too complex and just modeled after the Java way.
Of course, this is just my very subjective oppinion ;)
I agree.
About complexity, I have no other reference in c++ except in house boring and tedious package...but using log4cpp was quite simple in term of integration. So I do not quite agree with the "complexity" argument.... On the "Java way", I do not matter if the design comes from Java ofrSmalltalk or Eiffel or whatsoever if it does the job!!!.