Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.012 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.98; '*S*': 0.00; 'handler': 0.04; 'method.': 0.05; 'received:134': 0.05; 'reject': 0.05; 'correct.': 0.07; 'logic': 0.09; 'thrown': 0.09; '13:38,': 0.16; 'earlier': 0.21; 'seems': 0.23; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.25; 'header:User- Agent:1': 0.26; 'see,': 0.27; 'turns': 0.33; 'handle': 0.33; 'problem': 0.33; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.33; 'done': 0.34; 'thanks': 0.34; 'filter': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'method': 0.36; 'too': 0.36; 'correctly': 0.37; 'level': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'records': 0.68; 'low': 0.83; 'otten': 0.84; 'pardon': 0.84; 'subject:Making': 0.84 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AkgRAJwU9FCGuA9G/2dsb2JhbABEiQixFoN2gxIBBXgRCyEWDwkDAgECAUUTCAKIFa1ShwqOBYMpA5YLhViKcYJ2 Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:26:03 +0100 From: Antoon Pardon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:10.0.11) Gecko/20121123 Icedove/10.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Making a logging handler that produces context. References: <50F3E60D.2000503@rece.vub.ac.be> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 15 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1358173567 news.xs4all.nl 6946 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:44664 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:36786 Op 14-01-13 13:38, Peter Otten schreef: > It turns out the logic of the above is correct. The problem is that the > handler has to see the INFO-level records while the filter() method has to > reject them. The following configuration seems to achieve that: I see, I thought trowing away logrecords of too low a level was also done by the filter method. But if I now understand correctly logrecords of too low a level are thrown away earlier and don't even reach the handle method. Thanks for the insight. -- Antoon Pardon