On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 06:16:08AM -0500, David Santamauro wrote:
> The first thing that jumps out at me is Apache log4cxx. It is a robust
> logging framework based on Java log4j. It introduces dependencies on
> the apache portable runtime library
That together makes 29708 lines of code just for logging, only
including the unix specific parts of apr and not including tests,
examples and build stuff (and not including comments, lines with
only single opening or closing braces etc.).
The (C++) parts of LilyPond in contrast have 53860 lines of code using
the same counting script.
Lines of code for the OpenBSD syslogd: 2226. And for the client parts,
i.e. syslog(3) & friends: 232.
So, ignoring any potential licensing issue between the apache stuff
and the GPLv3 for now, log4cxx doesn't look appropriate by mere
size.
> The opposite end of the spectrum, is a much simpler logging class that
> I cook myself based on syslogd. It is controlled by command-line
> argument (--level | -l), exists as a global object and exposes the
> traditional methods:
> error()
> warn()
> notice()
> info()
> etc...
Just keep it as simple as possible. And as unconfigurable as possible
(use sane default settings). For LIlyPond, I don't even see any
need for ditinquishing between notice() and info().
Ciao,
Kili
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
