On 9/04/19 17:43, Skip Montanaro wrote:
>>> Is logging an unpopular package?
>> I've been writing Python applications for 20 years. On several
>> occasions, I've sat down determined to use it. After a frustrating
>> half a day or so trying to get it to do what I want (and failing),
>> I've always
On 8/04/19 23:14, DL Neil wrote:
> Is logging an unpopular package?
I think it does too much and too litle.
On the one hand, you are overwhelmed by the possibilities, most of which you
don't need.
On the other hand, you find that it is missing a number of levels in comparison
with syslog.
I als
> > Is logging an unpopular package?
>
> I've been writing Python applications for 20 years. On several
> occasions, I've sat down determined to use it. After a frustrating
> half a day or so trying to get it to do what I want (and failing),
> I've always given up and gone back to writing my own
On 2019-04-08, DL Neil wrote:
> Is logging an unpopular package?
I've been writing Python applications for 20 years. On several
occasions, I've sat down determined to use it. After a frustrating
half a day or so trying to get it to do what I want (and failing),
I've always given up and gone ba
Is logging an unpopular package?
Is extending its use, as described,
interesting/inappropriate/illogical/downright-crazy?
On 5/04/19 8:34 AM, DL Neil wrote:
Is the logging module an ideal means to provide (printed) user reports,
or is it a 'bad fit' and not designed/fit for such a purpose?
On 4/4/2019 3:34 PM, DL Neil wrote:
> ("oh, and it would be nice if you could send the file to me by email..."
> - they're always, um, never, (quite) satisfied...)
I refer to this as the Heisenberg Principle of computer programming: the
act of giving a user what he says he wants changes what he wa
Is the logging module an ideal means to provide (printed) user reports,
or is it a 'bad fit' and not designed/fit for such a purpose?
PSL's logging module (per discussion 'here' earlier this week) is often
quietly avoided by 'the average Python programmer'. It is unwieldy, yet
that is, in-par
