Hi Francois! On Sun, Oct 02, 2005 at 15:58 -0400, François Pinard wrote:
Hi, people. I just subscribed to py-dev@codespeak. The page at:
http://agiletesting.blogspot.com/2005/06/keyword-based-logging-with-py-libra...
says:
If you think you can use the keyword-based approach to logging in your own application code, or if you have a use case that you would like to see implemented via py.log, or if you have any suggestions at all, please leave a comment here of send email to py-dev at codespeak dot net.
So here! :-)
:-)
I'm preparing to clean up a big Python application which, among other things, (ab)uses the concept of logging, with many complex, over-loaded logging routines. My guess is that cleaning this single aspect, if done properly, would significantly reduce the amount of noise in the source code of this application, and so, somehow increase its legibility.
I'm always starving for clean, simple design, and this is how I got interested in `py.log'. Am I welcome at discussing logging issues here, in the context of `py.log', as they will pop up in our adventure?
Yes, it is. Actually the logging API is still quite experimental so your feedback is most welcome. In fact, there are two logging APIs. The current approach has a global dispatching mechanism that maps produced messages to consumers. Grig has described that in his blog. The new experimental approach is less dynamic and has a single entry "py.log.get(loggername, chan1=consumer, ...)" but it is not documented, unfortunately. I guess i need to make my mind up about the right approach. But for the time being, i'd suggest just forgetting about py.log.get() and sticking to the more documented approach. cheers, holger