# logging types in types.bif?

**URL:** <https://community.zeek.org/t/logging-types-in-types-bif/2324>\
**Category:** Development\
**Tags:** development\
**Created:** [May 26, 2012, 12:46am UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/logging-types-in-types-bif/2324 "2012-05-26T00:46:44Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Seth\_Hall3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Seth\_Hall3](https://community.zeek.org/u/Seth_Hall3)\
**Post date:** [May 26, 2012, 12:46am UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/logging-types-in-types-bif/2324/1 "2012-05-26T00:46:44Z")

</div>

This is mostly a question for Robin, but I thought it made sense to ask publicly. Is there a particular reason that Log::Writer and Log::ID types are defined in types.bif instead of logging.bif? It seems like it makes things more complicated than necessary by splitting them from their brethren BiFs in logging.bif.

&nbsp;&nbsp;.Seth

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![robin](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/community.zeek.org/robin/32/599_2.png) [@robin](https://community.zeek.org/u/robin)\
**Post date:** [May 29, 2012, 4:14pm UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/logging-types-in-types-bif/2324/2 "2012-05-29T16:14:21Z")

</div>

Yeah, putting them into logging.bif should work just as well and looks  
indeed like the right thing to do. As far as I recall, the only reason  
for having them in types.bif is that other enums are defined there.

Robin

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![system](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/uploads/zeek/original/1X/f09d732bc2cc7c7cc7e35db67cf4e1d5233ce7a7.png) [@system](https://community.zeek.org/u/system)\
**Post date:** [May 6, 2022, 3:40pm UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/logging-types-in-types-bif/2324/3 "2022-05-06T15:40:21Z")

</div>