[Python-ideas] Logging Levels

Mike Miller python-ideas at mgmiller.net
Wed Nov 29 12:51:13 EST 2017

Hi, IMHO the prior decision(s) are too conservative.  Reading the bugs, we can 
see lots of folks reinventing the wheel with common use cases for no good 
reason.  I also gave examples in the log4j, docs, and web apps world that these 
levels are recognized needs.

An addition would represent a very tiny fractional increase in the complexity of 
the logging module, from ~6 to ~8 in one small corner.  It's not like we're 
adding human expressions to cats and piles of poo here are we?  ;-)

The builtin java logging suffers from backwards compatibility with an awkward 
initial design.  log4j doesn't (nor we) have that problem, but it includes some 
cases suggested.

In short, have been using note and fatal for years productively.  Not a strong 
proponent of trace and have survived without it so far, but if it were there I'd 
have used it a few times over the years.

On 2017-11-28 12:17, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> 28.11.17 21:45, Guido van Rossum пише:
>> These look like good improvements. I think you should make an issue on 
>> bugs.python.org <http://bugs.python.org> describing your proposal and if you 
>> can submit a PR that implements it.
> See https://bugs.python.org/issue31732
> It was discussed and rejected. Citing Raymond: "Overall, this seems rehash and 
> second guess the discussions and decisions made 15 years ago when PEP 282 was 
> accepted."
> The set of logging levels is not closed. The user can extend it to cover more 
> specialized uses by logging.addLevelName(). There are disadvantages of having 
> too much standard names for logging levels (as we can see in Java).

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list