> > As it happens, in LibreOffice code, "#ifdef DEBUG" is 1:1 equivalent to "#if > (OSL_DEBUG_LEVEL >= 2)", and the thought was that perhaps all instances of > "#ifdef DEBUG" should be changed to that instead, to make it more clear that > it is a rather rare way to build, that code inside "#ifdef DEBUG" is *not* > compiled in a normal --enable-debug or --enable-dbgutil build, but one needs > the much more rare case of increasing the dbglevel thing. > > It has even been suggested in the past we should get rid of those dbglevel, > or OSL_DEBUG_LEVEL, things, to make the configuration space smaller. It is > quite enough (in my opinion) to have --enable-debug, --enable-dbgutil, > --enable-symbols, --enable-assert-always-abort, and --enable-sal-log, that > all have related but different meanings. Also --enable-release-build could be > interpreted as being related. And I probably forgot some...
Having fallen into this pitfall a couple of times and got a headache understanding why the code was not executed, I highly favor to at least change to OSL_DEBUG_LEVEL >= 2. I am one of those who would like to remove the debug levels, but lately (spending far too much time in the internal UNO workings), I am a little afraid that we have a lot of bit rotten code waiting to become a problem. So doing this change in a branch would be wise. rgds jan I > > Currently, when somebody loosely talks about "debug mode" vs "release mode" > (as is common for people coming from a background of Visual Studio projects, > for instance), it is fairly unclear what they actually mean. We should strive > to make it clearer. > > What you say "make my own DEBUG build", what do you mean exactly? > > --tml > > _______________________________________________ > LibreOffice mailing list > LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
_______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
