Hello Cliff, First, my reply will be from my library position. Sorry, JD, I didn't have time to review your latest implementation yet. Second, I'd like to thank you, Cliff, for your verbose answer. Your feedback is very appreciated.
One requirement (imo) that seems to be missing or is under-emphasized is the following:
-- Provide a simple, light, "compilable away", low-dependency header / "log source" interface for middle layer general purpose libraries (e.g. many of the Boost libraries, or a third party general purpose library).
My implementation has the concept of sources, and loggers model it. Do you mean that loggers may be inappropriate to be used in libraries? If so, why? BTW, although it is not ready yet, I'm planning to implement both the "complile-away" and "single-threaded" features.
The logging implementations so far seem to be "code only" instead of concentrating on the rationale, use cases, and client interfaces. I think there's danger of another "log library rejection" without some "stepping back and re-thinking" (and I've forgotten most of the original log library review comments - I should go back and re-read, since I'm sure I'm repeating comments already said).
I'll be happy to add any of these comments to the Wiki Boost Log area - let me know (I can also assist with library requirements and design - I've designed and developed at least two logging libraries in past projects).
I can assure you, there was a considerable discussion on the requirements to the logging library Boost needs. We considered previous submissions reviews too. This resulted to Wiki page here: http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?Boost.Logging with all major corner stones and even some discussions. I think, many of your requirements are listed there - I'd be glad if you review this page and post your vision on it. You may also add your comments there too. -- Best regards, Andrey mailto:andysem@mail.ru