Open bharel opened 2 months ago
Hi @bharel,
I'm not opposed to giving the defaults
argument a purpose, but what purpose would that be?
Keep in mind that we already have the static_fields
parameter which is not going away any time soon as I won't break backwards compatibility without good reason.
Exactly the same purpose that it has in the standard library - provide a default value for optional fields.
Atm if a field doesn't exist it is returned as null.
Static fields are not doing the same thing - they always exist and override the other values.
Okay I think I understand what you're getting at.
Essentially from the interactions of parsing required fields, renaming fields, and the actual fields on a log message it's possible that a field becomes None
because of a missing value.
Which means what I think you're proposing is that we use the defaults
dict to provide backup values for any field.
In which case I'd be happy to accept a patch :) In case you haven't seen it you can find the contributing guidelines here
The defaults parameter that Logging.Formatter takes is ignored. We can make it work 😄
I can submit a patch :-)