Göran, Re "left running," while it is not my intention to throw up the knee-jerk "NO" that has been so common in other projects, I do think we should demand a torture test of any logging system that we adopt. If it can't be started and safely forgotten, it isn't ready. Is the code base small because it is simple and elegant (good) or because it is missing a lot of functionality to let it pass the set and forget test? I don't know the answer, but the question must be asked, and my vote is to adopt only after the answer is favorable.
Your observation about new tools is well taken. Your experience on an old laptop is very interesting. If you really want to watch a struggle, compare Pharo to Dolphin running across a remote desktop connection. I am no Morphic expert, but it makes me wonder just how much of the screen is being redrawn and whether a lot of that could be avoided. Good performance on modest hardware is of value. You mention "shiny new stuff," but that is largely in the IDE or parallel systems (e.g. Nile, Ocean). The alternative is to continue to languish with Squeak's streams, sockets, file system, etc. Parts of Squeak are the way they are because they predate structured exception handling. Pharo is catching up on 15 years of refactoring to take advantage of 25 years of advancing technology. There will be some instability along the way, but the released versions have been pretty good so far. No doubt we can and should do better as Pharo evolves. Bill ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Göran Krampe [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 7:34 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] simpleLog in pharo? Hi! On 09/09/2010 01:18 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > Göran, > > I think before we adopt anything, it should have the "left running" scenario > addressed in some way. Pharo is supposed to be robust. > That mean losing the silent failures, and doing so in a way that the new information does not bring the system to its knees. First - I did not bring this up, so feel free to fix any flaws you see/find :). The code base is very small. Secondly - my impression of Pharo so far is not really "robust", and don't get me wrong here - it is not criticism, but my feeling every time I have used Pharo is that it is smack full of new stuff (completion, OB browsers etc etc) which quite often seems to break and also makes it painful to develop on my old trusty kinda slow Dell laptop. It seems to me that "progress" (new shiny stuff!) has been put in favor of robustness, which probably is why Pharo is attractive to a lot of people. Perhaps Pharo changed focus for next release? Sorry for that little rant, don't really "mean" anything with it, just curious to see if I am the only one with this feeling. > On Windows, OutputDebugString() is probably good enough. Since I am doing > everything I can to ditch said platform, I might not be the best person to > ask. Certainly, it is where I would go for a live view, and a file-based log > would then cover everything else - I think. > > On Linux, you mention lots of tools: any recommendations? No :). But there are lots of syslog related tools, just google it. :) regards, Göran _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
