Closed yahman72 closed 2 years ago
Sounds ok to me. Supporting wild cards with the actual message would sounds useful as well. Not sure is it already supported.
Supporting wild cards with the actual message would sounds useful as well. Not sure is it already supported.
yeah, that one is already there i.e. that REGEXP:
stuff
Yeah, that's what I remembered. As i wrote earlier, adding more wildcard support is fine. Will need someone to provide a PR with tests and docs, though. Are you @yahman72 interested? Anything in the design we should discuss?
I can have a look, would need this for my project anyway ...
wrt. design: IMHO not, at least not yet (didn't look at the code), as long as the above proposal is okay i.e.
*
for the log index wildcard :*
ANY
as the log level wildcardDone #33
Any thoughts about supporting wildcards in the log verification? i.e. in
LOG x.y:z LEVEL Actual message
My use cases for this would be:
-L
argument) will cause the log index check (:z
) to fail --> e.g. use:*
ANY
as log levelIMHO the above should not cause too much hassle as it would be backwards compatible