kutil VS SLF4J

For reference, here's my implementation. Note that my wrapper supports both structured and traditional logging APIs.

For JS in Go use goja, which offers excellent integration with Go. Also I maintain an extension that adds Common-JS compatibility to it.

I think your instinct is right. For all my projects I use these wrappers. If you have any feedback or contributions they would be much appreciated. I know it's a losing battle, but there's no choice but to fight. Semper fi.

This is mostly what I did with my kutil logging library (sorry, no good documentation on how to use it yet). So I can use the same API in all my code and then pick various backends per project in order to better unify the log. For example, in Kubernetes I can use klog as the backend. I also wrote my own "simple" backend that does everything that I personally want. I'm sure there are other similar libraries out there.

I really like the idea of an Extended JSON, so I created my own version called "CJSON". The code is pretty straightforward.

A few years ago, my team moved from Java to Go. Working on Go projects, we encountered a wide variety of logging frameworks with different APIs, configuration, and formatting. We soon found ourselves longing for a logging abstraction layer like Java’s slf4j, which had proven invaluable for use in reusable libraries or configuring and debugging production systems. So, not long after moving to Go, we began working toward replacing what we had lost in slf4j.

I'm not familiar with Serilog as I code mostly in Java, use slf4j (logs to stdout) and our apps send logs to Cloudwatch using the task definition's awslogs configuration. I prefer it this way because I can customize the log configurations in my task definitions. Also the default stream name has this format prefix-name/container-name/ecs-task-id so I can easily identify the logs of the task I want to look at. I haven't experienced any downsides with this approach and our apps publish a shit ton of logs. Cloudwatch approach looks like you can customize the stream name?

slf4j is open source. You can look at the code.

Java -> Logback, Log4j2, JDK (Java Util Logging), Slf4j, e.t.c.

slf4j para padronização dos logs;

SLF4J

> My God. Logging in protobuf?

Yes, or any other data format and/or transport protocol.

I'm surprised this is up for debate.

> Logging is the lowest of all debugging utilities - its the first thing you ever do writing software - “hello world”. And, while I admire structural logging, the truth is printing strings remains (truly) the lowest common denominator across software developers.

This sort of comment is terribly miopic. You can have a logging API, and then configure your logging to transport the events anywhere, any way. This is a terribly basic feature and requirement, and one that comes out of the box with some systems. Check how SLF4J[1] is pervasive in Java, and how any SLF4J implementation offers logging to stdout or a local file as a very specific and basic usecase.

It turns out that nowadays most developers write software that runs on many computers that aren't stashed over or under their desks, and thus they need efficient and convenient ways to check what's happening either in a node or in all deployments.

[1] https://www.slf4j.org/