选择在应用程序中使用哪个界面确实是一个问题。如果您更喜欢Serilog的 ILogger 较短的方法名称（例如 log.Error 与 log.LogError ），否则，请使用Microsoft的通用 ILogger<> 。您可以控制自己项目中使用的所有依赖项，因此没有充分的技术理由偏爱一个依赖项。

Choosing which interface to use within your application is a matter of taste, really. If you prefer Serilog's ILogger shorter method names (e.g. log.Error vs log.LogError), go with that, otherwise use the Microsoft's generic ILogger<>. You have control over all the dependencies you use in your own projects, so there's no strong technical reason to prefer one over the other.

您可能会对阅读此问题感兴趣在Serilog的回购中：

You might be interested in reading this issue on Serilog's repo:

我应该使用Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.ILogger还是Serilog.ILogger？。

I在我所有的项目中都亲自使用Serilog的 ILogger 不仅是因为我更喜欢较短的方法名，还因为我更喜欢 not 在其中插入记录器每个类的每个构造函数，并且使用 Log.ForContext<> 的每个类的上下文记录器，在解决问题时非常有用。例如，

I personally use Serilog's ILogger across all my projects not only because I do prefer the shorter method names, but also because I prefer not to inject a logger in every single constructor of every class, and it's also easy to have a contextual logger for every class using Log.ForContext<>, which is useful when troubleshooting issues. E.g.

public class SomeService
{
    private readonly ILogger _log = Log.ForContext<SomeService>();
    // ...
}

public class SomeRepository
{
    private readonly ILogger _log = Log.ForContext<SomeRepository>();
    // ...
}

但是，如果您正在开发库，我建议您使用Microsoft的通用 ILogger<> ，而不是使用对 Serilog 的依赖，并迫使您的库的使用者也对 Serilog 的依赖。

If you were developing a library though, I'd recommend using Microsoft's generic ILogger<>, of course, instead of taking a dependency on Serilog and force consumers of your library to also take a dependency on Serilog.

Log.Logger 是线程安全的，因此在您进行操作时注册为单例如果您希望所有类共享同一个实例，则上述方法是正确的（没有 SourceContext s ）-没错。

Log.Logger is thread-safe, thus registering as a singleton as you are doing above is correct if you want all classes to share the same instance (without SourceContexts) - nothing wrong with that.