On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 12:57 -0400, Renier Morales wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 09/19/2007 > 11:53:00 AM: > > > In the future, I may have some time to go through the code and try > to > > make this more consistent, but we should discuss the strategy here > > first. Should we just make simple changes from dbg() to trace() as > we > > find these in the code, or is there need for a bigger effort, now > that > > OpenHPI is getting more mature and being used in production > > environments? > > > > Yes to both questions. The confusion that helped the inconsitencies to > come about has been due probably to the names of the macros. dbg() was > and is intended to be used for reporting errors, so the name of the > macro is misleading. > We should change dbg() to be error() and trace() to be dbg(). Then, as > you suggest, switch everything that isn't an error to use dbg(). For > now, I think that is what makes most sense to me.
After a little more discussion, and seeing no further input from the list, I've opened a couple of issues, #1804510 (to rename the macros) and #1804512 (to fix usage). The main consequence for other OpenHPI developers (including out-of-tree plugins) will be: dbg() will be renamed to err() trace() will be renamed to dbg() Please express any concerns with this change as soon as possible. -- Bryan Sutula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Openhpi-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openhpi-devel
