BIND 10 #558: Disable log4cxx dependency in logging API
BIND 10 Development
do-not-reply at isc.org
Tue Feb 8 14:32:51 UTC 2011
#558: Disable log4cxx dependency in logging API
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: stephen | Owner: stephen
Type: defect | Status: reviewing
Priority: major | Milestone: R-Team-
Component: logging | Sprint-20110208
Keywords: | Resolution:
Estimated Number of Hours: 2.0 | Sensitive: 0
Billable?: 1 | Add Hours to Ticket: 0
Internal?: 0 | Total Hours: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by jelte):
* owner: jelte => stephen
Comment:
I'm unsure what the goal (and/or the next step) is now; I had the
following comments, until I realized that the whole purpose was to really
remove log4cxx use, but only 'temporarily', as it says in the ticket, so
what to do about this?
{{{
lib/log/Makefile.am (also) contains a few commented-out includes (for
LOG4CXX) that can probably be removed now (as well as the commented-out
part of configure.ac)
is logger_impl_log4cxx.h still used (or cc for that matter)?
}}}
The pimpl use itself (in logger_impl.h) seems a bit off, isn't the idea
not to actually *define* the xxxImpl class in the headers, but to only
name it and let the .cc define it?
Minor points for the code:
is lib/log/tests/xdebuglevel_unittest still used? (it got commented out in
the makefile) (perhaps also related to above)
Really minor (and i mean MINOR, one would almost call it trivial) naming
point:
LoggerImpl* getLoggerptr() {
It's private and all, just wanted to mention that we tend to capitalize
'ptr' in the rest of our code :)
(although, come to think of it, we use the Ptr postfix usually to name a
shared_ptr)
You might want to have the generator include some comments before that
initializer and instantiator as to why they are necessary, and why they
have such a weird name (and/or why that doesn't matter).
LoggerImpl, lots of lexical casts there (because of the change of
MessageID I guess), which seem unnecessary in this context, why not pass
the ident and text as separate arguments to output(), and have that
function operator<<() them separately?
I am not sure I oppose your suggestion at the bottom of #559, btw, perhaps
more of this actually warrants a focused phone discussion?
Apart from this, the code looks ok, btw :) (though perhaps Jinmei wants to
have a quick look at the changes for the init problem)
--
Ticket URL: <http://bind10.isc.org/ticket/558#comment:9>
BIND 10 Development <http://bind10.isc.org>
BIND 10 Development
More information about the bind10-tickets
mailing list