On 16 April 2008 at 11:45, "Alexey Varlamov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> 2008/4/16, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I think we need more consensus on this. Is everyone in agreement about
> > dumping log4cxx? Is this patch the appropriate replacement?
>
> Well, the suggestion has positive responses from me, Xiao-Feng and
> Ilya Berezhniuk, and no specifc opposing arguments. Let's wait last
> 24h, tomorrow I'll commit if no objections.
+1 from me; making the logging more consistent is a big improvement.
Nice work Alexei.
I see no reason not to apply it as is but do have some trivial observations:
0) I'd probably make the change to vm/em/src/EBProfileCollector.cpp:
- loggingEnabled = is_info_enabled(LOG_DOMAIN);
- if (!loggingEnabled) {
- loggingEnabled = is_info_enabled(catName.c_str());
- }
+ loggingEnabled = log_is_info_enabled(LOG_DOMAIN) ||
log_is_info_enabled(catName.c_str());
to be consistent with a couple of similar chunks of code.
1) There is no reason for:
Property changes on: vm/port/src/logger/logparams.cpp
___________________________________________________________________
Name: svn:executable
+ *
2) It is hard to see the relevance of some changes. Such as adding the:
#include "open/hythread.h"
to vm/vmcore/include/stack_trace.h or making native_get_regs_from_jit_context
static.
3) Why were @version and @author tags removed from some files and only @version
tags from others? Some of these were removed from files that were otherwise
untouched so cynical people might think someone was just trying to make the
number of '-' lines in the patch look "better". ;-)
4) There were lots of spurious changes that could have been made in a
trivial cleanup patch to keep the important changes more transparent.
Things like removing @version tags, renaming pool1 back to pool, and
changes like:
-#ifndef _VMCORE_LOG_H_
-#define _VMCORE_LOG_H_
+#ifndef _VMCORE_LOG_H
+#define _VMCORE_LOG_H
and removing the '#if 0' block from vm/vmcore/src/class_support/class_impl.cpp.
-Mark.
