On 12/7/10 4:59 PM, Robert Kern wrote: > On 12/7/10 2:26 PM, Vinay Sajip wrote: >> This issue was brought to my notice today: >> >> http://bugs.python.org/issue10626 >> >> and reference was made in the comments to possible obstacles facing stdlib >> maintainers who might wish to use logging in the stdlib and in its unit tests. >> >>> From my perspective and as mentioned in the logging documentation, library code >> which uses logging should add a NullHandler instance to any top-level logger, >> which will avoid any "No handlers could be found for logger XXX" message if no >> logging handlers have been set up. > > I've done that before in my own library code, then quickly realized that it was > a bad idea. Adding a NullHandler silently prevents logging.basicConfig() from > working. Only on the root handler. Forget this bit of my argument (and the statements that directly follow from it). The rest of my argument should stand on its own, though. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4