Lemme correct myself... This stuff is a big deal *if* it is in code that gets called a lot.
Andrew Scherpbier wrote: > The object reference and method call are still performed even if > nothing gets logged. By using a simple test, that overhead is removed > if it is not needed. > This is actually a big deal. It is even better if the test can be > done on a constant, because then the compiler can decide if the code > needs to be included or not and there is no overhead if the constant > is false. > > marc fleury wrote: > >> ??? >> >> I have a conflict on ServiceDeployer.java >> >> the conflict is due to the inclusion of "if (debug) log.debug(...)" >> >> with debug being log.isDebugEnabled()... >> >> do we need to explicitely do that? I thought part of the interest is >> that >> the log4j thing would not do anything with the messages if debug was not >> enabled so why the explicit test? >> >> I will remove these unless something clearly says the contrary >> >> marcf >> >> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Marc Fleury >> President >> JBoss Group, LLC >> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Jboss-development mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
