From: Richard Day (richardvday_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-04 19:05:46
JD wrote:
>> The author of Pantheios (http://pantheios.sourceforge.net) seems to
>> think he really does know what it is, and has found the "sweet spot."
>> I have no opinion about whether he's right or not, but it would be a
>> good idea for someone who's familiar with the recent Boost discussion
>> to review his work before proceeding too much further.
>>
>>
>
> Thanks David for your advice.
> So here is some stuff I read from the documentation (.chm):
>
> <snip>
>
> I am not an expert in design and in no position in rejecting any library
> or whatever, and I have actually not even look into the code but IMO,
> just as reading few pages of the doc, I think pantheios is not what we
> are looking for. I would love to be wrong and that someone says,
> "pantheios is what we were looking for all those years, let put it into
> boost". I doubt it...
>
> Please, someone more experienced have a quick look and tell me I'm wrong.
>
> Thanks.
>
> JD
>
>
I wouldn't say I am more experienced but I will say that I also looked
at pantheios when it was first suggested.
It seems to be unnecessarily complex and introduces yet another library
which I do not want or need.
I believe you will have an extremely hard time making a logging library
that pleases everyone.
You can please some of the people some of the time but you cant please
all of the people all of the time.
I hope we can come up with something that will be acceptable to enough
people to make it into boost soon.
RVD