On Jan 12, 2:16 pm, Stuart Halloway <stuart.hallo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is the performance impact of a runtime function call so critical for > logging that we need to do this at macro-expansion-time?
Yes, insofar as I don't want performance impact to discourage people from peppering their code with (disabled) log messages. Richard covers the case pretty well. > I would like for logging to be less magical in its implementation. I don't see the leveraging of macro evalutaion to be "magic"; I view it as a great advantage of clojure to not be limited to only compile- time and run-time (given the recent AOTC-compatibility demands, not everyone agrees). Take a look at the java code that commons-logging needs to pick the right implementation at runtime; it's way more complex and magical than what c.c.logging does.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
