Why no Debug implementation on Logger?

[Nicholas-Clavette]

Hey folks,

Loving this crate, thanks for the hard work. We are storing Loggers as members in a project. We are liberally using #[derive(Debug)] as we develop. Without a Debug implementation on Logger, we can't easily derive it on our structs.

I am wondering if there is any reasoning here to not have Debug implemented on Logger? It could be as simple as:

impl Debug for Logger {
    fn fmt(&self, f: &mut std::fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> std::fmt::Result {
        fn describe_periodic_flusher(logger: &Logger) -> String {
            match logger.periodic_flusher.try_lock() {
                Err(_) => String::from("Cannot describe: currently locked"),
                Ok(opt) => {
                    match *opt {
                        Some((dur, _)) => format!("{}ms", dur.as_millis()),
                        None => String::from("Unset"),
                    }
                }
            }
        }
        
        f.debug_struct("Logger")
            .field("name", &self.name)
            .field("level_filter", &self.level_filter)
            // Could spice up "sinks"
            .field("sinks", &format!("{}", self.sinks.len()))
            .field("periodic_flusher", &describe_periodic_flusher(self))
            .finish()
    }
}

Thoughts?
Thanks!

[SpriteOvO]

Having a Debug impl for Logger makes sense, it was just forgotten when it was first designed. Would you like make a PR for it? I'd like to merge it :)

I think it's fine to directly lock periodic_flusher in the fn fmt, it doesn't get locked frequently elsewhere, so this won't impact the performance. And since there is already a Debug impl for Duration, you can just format it with {:?} instead of describing it manually.

[Nicholas-Clavette]

Awesome, I'd love to! Will get right on it lol.