redirect prints to log file

Putting your own file-like in sys.stdout will let you capture the text output via print.

You should take a look at python logging module

EDIT: Sample code:

import logging

if __name__ == "__main__":
    logging.basicConfig(level=logging.DEBUG, filename="logfile", filemode="a+",
                        format="%(asctime)-15s %(levelname)-8s %(message)s")
    logging.info("hello")

Produce a file named “logfile” with content:

2012-10-18 06:40:03,582 INFO     hello

You can redirect replace sys.stdout with any object which has same interface as sys.stdout, in that object’s write you can print to terminal and to file too. e.g. see this recipe http://code.activestate.com/recipes/119404-print-hook/

A simple way to redirect stdout and stderr using the logging module is here:
How do I duplicate sys.stdout to a log file in python?

• Next time, you’ll be happier if instead of using print statements at all you use the logging module from the start. It provides the control you want and you can have it write to stdout while that’s still where you want it.

• Many people here have suggested redirecting stdout. This is an ugly solution. It mutates a global and—what’s worse—it mutates it for this one module’s use. I would sooner make a regex that changes all print foo to print >>my_file, foo and set my_file to either stdout or an actual file of my choosing.

  • If you have any other parts of the application that actually depend on writing to stdout (or ever will in the future but you don’t know it yet), this breaks them. Even if you don’t, it makes reading your module look like it does one thing when it actually does another if you missed one little line up top.
  • Chevron print is pretty ugly, but not nearly as ugly as temporarily changing sys.stdout for the process.
  • Very technically speaking, a regex replacement isn’t capable of doing this right (for example, it could make false positives if you are inside of a multiline string literal). However, it’s apt to work, just keep an eye on it.

• os.system is virtually always inferior to using the subprocess module. The latter needn’t invoke the shell, doesn’t pass signals in a way that usually is unwanted, and can be used in a non-blocking manner.

You can create a log file and prepare it for writing. Then create a function:

def write_log(*args):
    line = ' '.join([str(a) for a in args])
    log_file.write(line+'n')
    print(line)

and then replace your print() function name with write_log()

Just a note about append vs write mode. Change filemode to “w” if you would like it to replace log file. I also had to comment out the stream. Then using logging.info() was outputting to file specified.

if __name__ == '__main__':
    LOG_FORMAT = '%(asctime)s:%(levelname)s ==> %(message)s'
    logging.basicConfig(
        level=logging.INFO,
        filename="logfile",
        filemode="w",
        format=LOG_FORMAT
        #stream=sys.stdout
    )

there are many way to write output into the ‘.log’ file

Logging is a means of tracking events it happen when some file runs. Is also indicate that certain events have occurred.

import logging
logging.basicConfig(filename='example.log', encoding='utf-8', level=logging.DEBUG)
logging.debug('This is debug message')
logging.info('This is information message')
logging.warning('This is warning message')
logging.error('This is warning message')

another method to use to reduce all that thing sinple what ever you print to the console that all will be saved to the ”log” file

python abc.py > abc.log

by using this method you can write everything to the log file

def log(txt):
    f = open(__file__ + '.log', "a")
    f.write(txt + 'rn')
    f.close()

Usage:

log('Hello World!')

Example:

python3 helloworld.py

Will append to file ./helloworld.py.log. If file doesn’t exist, it will create it.