|
From: | Joachim Jaeckel |
Subject: | [Help-smalltalk] Re: Logging facility for GNU-smalltalk |
Date: | Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:50:24 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103) |
I now totaly agree, that a StreamOutputHandler is more than usefull. That gives the user the possibility to handle his special needs beside of that what is implemented in the current logger. - But even now, it could be implemented and give it to the implementation of the logger as the output-handler of a new "channel". But nevertheless, a StreamOutputHandler should be contained in the logger. Even as a superclass for File-output-handling and whatever.
But as I understand, it seems to me, that we use the logging a bit different. (Please don't understand me wrong, the discussion is really interesting for me!)
Logging (for me) should be a black box. I don't care, to what my logging is written and if I need a special action at the start/end of the logging. (e.g. opening/closing the log-file, Flushing the output or: writing the log as an html-file, you need some closing </body></html> at the end of the log-file) beside of a configuration-file, which could be altered without rewriting program-code.
Time is running...Would be nice if we end up with a logging-utility, that serves most of our all needs...
Regards, Joachim.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |