Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| It seems we do not have much choice, then :)
Correct :-)
| Lars> debugstream.debug(DebugStream::WARN) << "more debug(WARN)\n";
|
| What about something like
| debugstream[DebugStream::WARN] << "more debug(WARN)\n";
| instead? It is shorter and looks much nicer, IMO.
Sure, I added an
ostream & operator[](debug_type t) {
return debug(t);
}
| Likewise, could we
| rename DebugStream to Debug, in order to shorten the constant names?
Why rename DebugStream? I think you mean debugstream, anyway I planned
to do:
DebugStream lyxerr;
in the lyx code to keep the changes to a minimum.
But perhaps we should change that name too, to avoid confusion.
Lgb
