Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] About Handler::log()

[Emre T. <emr...@gm...>]

Hi Dean,

We can provide various methods to register callback, actually maybe all of them. Using boost::function (with or without a system::error argument) + a class with log() function + two different handlers for data & error. But, to provide this flexibility we will need to have a "virtual" overhead somewhere deep in the implementation. I'll give it a try for this, after that we can think about it further.

Take care,

emre

On Feb 24, 2011, at 10:02 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Emre Türkay <emr...@gm...> wrote:
>> Hi Dean,
>> 
>> On Feb 24, 2011, at 7:01 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Emre,
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 6:22 AM, Emre Türkay <emr...@gm...> wrote:
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>> 
>>>> In file boost/network/protocol/http/server/sync_connection.http (in sync_connection::start), line 57, there is a call to Handler::log(string).
>>>> 1. This conflicts with the documentation, where there is no hello_world::log() method implemented in the simple http server example.
>>>> 2. Do we really need to keep it that way, i.e., we can make boost::system::system_error an extra argument to the handler function (like asio handlers). By this way, it would even be possible to implement a handler with a free standing function and pass the http::server a ptr to function instead of a functor, for simple cases.
>>>> 
>>>> What you think?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I like #2 -- do you have a pull request? :)
>> 
>> No, I wanted to ask before diving in. I'm still reading the docs ;) I'll try if I can make it.
>> 
> 
> Cool, no worries. :)
> 
> I suggest looking at the cases where the log function is called -- I
> think calling the handler with an extra error argument is a little
> confusing. I like the approach of providing an error handling function
> to the constructor of the HTTP server, and if one isn't provided a
> default error handler is provided that optionally prints information
> to standard error. There was a suggestion to use Boost.Log but I don't
> see how this could be done with Boost.Log not yet being in the
> releases (last I checked).
> 
> This should be easy to do and I would really appreciate it if you can
> give that a shot -- as I have very limited time at the moment to be
> able to work on the library.
> 
> Have a good one and I look forward to your pull requests!
> 
> -- 
> Dean Michael Berris
> about.me/deanberris