2. With my propositions one need not know anything about iostreams
Instead one will need to override single method - saveMessage,
but in LogStreamBuf, not in LogStream. This is not performance issue
(performance will be the same), but instead it's philosophy issue.
As for simplicity - my way there is only one-way tie between stream
and streambuf,
and you have two-way tie. I win.
3. We'll break it in my case as well. Just in my scenario you don't need to
even think about memory allocation/deallocation. Everything will be
taken care of automatically.
Alexey Parshin wrote:
>1. - we agreed I'd change that. It isn't a big deal so no need to argue.
>2. - I don't want to derive different buffers. I want to derive different
>log classes with one virtual method. This way it's much simplier, doesn't
>require to know anything about the implementation of streams, and I don't
>see any performance issues.
>3. - the alternative is - if the msg is too large we brake it on two parts.
>
>2006/1/31, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh <ilya@total-knowledge.com>:
>
>
>>I took a look at your code. Here are few comments.
>>
>>1. Like I mentioned on IRC, overriding operator<<(ostream&, enum)
>> may not be a good idea due to promotion rules between enums and ints
>> I'd create small wrapper class with const values instead.
>>2. the way you handle actual log output through containing stream seems
>> to go against streams philosophy. Stream does formatting, streambuf
>> does write ops.
>> What I'd do, is define pure virtual saveLog method in CBaseLogBuf,
>> and then override it in derived buffers.
>> Unfortunately C++ does not have a way to prevent derived classes
>> further overriding base class' virtual methods, so you'd have to
>>document
>> that overflow() should not be touched.
>>
>>3. Making internal buffer resizable might be an issue - this way attacker
>> could cause logging server to log infinitely large line, which would
>> cause server to run out of memory.
>> Instead just allocate fixed-size buffer.
>>
>>Other then that, it looks OK.
>>
>>Alexey Parshin wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I have finally commited a first draft of very first class - CLogFile, to
>>>SPTK, along with the test example. I'd add logger interface in a day or
>>>
>>>
>>two.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>--
>>Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
>>Total Knowledge. CTO
>>http://www.total-knowledge.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>--
>Alexey Parshin,
>http://www.sptk.net
>
>
>
--
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
Total Knowledge. CTO
http://www.total-knowledge.com