Mikhail Fursov wrote:
On 10/29/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
1) The Logging Debate That Won't Die - we don't want to encumber our
"production" code with logging or even with runtime enablement checks
for logging i.e.
if (logging.isDebugEnabled())
but it's clear that some people still want to use it for debugging.
Just a small idea: Let teach JIT to purge this code unless special option is ON
? Doing this we solve performance issue at least .
Well, then we have a classlibrary that is only good for use with JIT's
that have been specially trained to find code that looks like very
common code for logging implementations.
The results could be hilarious, actually.
If we did this, I assume that our build becomes a two step process,
first pre-process the code to create separate "buildable source", which
would go into source jars and such for debugging purposes. Then our
current javac/jar process.
I'd also like to be able to work in an IDE with the pre-proc stuff
invisible if possible...
This is the main problem. Backporting of
your changes from the "buildable source" to the "source with
preprocessor" could have more overhead then support of a separate branch
for different Java version.
No - you'd edit the original source directly - you wouldn't edit the
pre-processed source.
But a plugin would let you flip between original and processed...
geir
--
Mikhail Fursov
