That said, I'd be hard pressed to give a coherant reason why I shouldn't used DEBUG. But I don't.
geir
On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 03:41 AM, Endre Stølsvik wrote:
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
| Endre, | | A number of user expressed their desire to see the TRACE level | added. However, please note that log4j domains (to be introduced | in log4j 1.3) should provide a much better alternative to adding a | TRACE level or any other level for that matter.
That is all well and good, but what the heck is domains? ;)
I -don't- want to have any more if's and then's and whatnot's to log my trace statement. I want to write, AT THE MOST: if (log.isTraceEnabled()) log.trace("My bleedin' trace statement!");
Having my programmers/developers "programmatically" check for some extra
class ("domain"?) and whatnot, or extend the Logger class, or do -anything
more than that if-, seems totally far off, given that log4j is supposed to
be -the- Logging System of The Java Universe!
TRACE will be the level with absolutely most log-lines, by a factor of
probably ten or more to the next level: THERE CANNOT BE any more overhead
than that simple IF mentioned above!
And also, given that trace will be the one single level you most often
actually write in your code, it can't be larger than that piece of code
either - we do have "code templates" in our IDE, but it could -look- ugly
in the code, and thus hinder human-parsing..!
|
| At 06:07 PM 10/29/2003 +0100, Endre Stølsvik wrote:
|
| >That is not good enough. I don't want to make some stupid wrapper or
| >whatnot - I can change the entire logging system instead then. I want to
| >use a PROPER logging-tool, and I'm fed up with log4j not having Trace -
| >the most needed logging level of them all except for debug.
| >
| >Commons logging ..
|
| What about commons logging?
It has it!! But so far the only -proper- log "factory" of commons logging
seems to be log4j, WHICH IS MISSING IT! But I -don't- want to make my own
wrapper system, if I end up having to do that, I'd rather use commons
logging, and then potentially migrate away from log4j. This is not a
threat as such: I'm just pointing it out to give an impression of my
desire to GET THAT LEVEL! I'm kind of fed up NOT having it. It annoys me
while coding. It rather pisses me of when I have to debug some other
persons' code: they've removed those statemets, since they made too much
noise on the debug level.
How many other log-packages you know of haven't got a TRACE level, or
similar? jdk1.4 have the stupid "fine*" levels, but they then go even
further than what I suggest.
"Trace" and "Debug" seems to me like the two most important DEVELOPMENT
tools. Info, warn, error and fatal are PRODUCTION levels. If you view it
this way, there is only ONE single level -dedicated- to the development
process in log4j: WHY CAN'T I HAVE MY TRACE LEVEL?!?!
"Trace" is a very natural level. It "traces" the program (unix dude?
Tried "[l|s]trace" or "truss"?), while 'debug' rather gives more of some
"overview"-type debugging information. You can turn on debug for the whole
tree, to get "debug-context", then -trace- the piece
you're actually debugging. Get my drift?
|
| >|
| >| Btw: This has been brought up many times on the log4j-user list (where
| >| comments and questions like this should be posted), so a quick search of the
| >| list archives would've pointed it out...
| >
| >I know. I just wanted to chime in..
| >
| >And WITH all that noise, WHY NOT add it? It seems REALL REALLY silly to
| >me.
|
| Because we have a better alternative.
You'll have to delve a little into that, and as a suggestion for further
adoption of log4j, PUT ALL THESE ARGUMENTS -clearly- visible on the
webpages of log4j.
How many other levels are people whining about? How many times haven't you had to point this stuff out, and argue with people, and try to "defend" log4j not having it?
=DEVELOPERS= want the trace level! TRUST ME!
Have you seen the other replies to my post? All of them say something like "well, Endre-boy, you WHINE too much, BUT I DO AGREE!". ;)
| | >Endre - a long-time user of log4j. | | and a log4j contributor.
Oh, well, thanks, those 8 lines of code were really something, weren't they?... ;-D
Ceki: log4j is excellent. But it lacks trace!
Endre.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Geir Magnusson Jr 203-247-1713(m) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
