Am 06.05.2013 um 08:00 schrieb Denis Kudriashov <dionisi...@gmail.com>:
> Hello. > > What about logging levels? > > I like "logInfo:", "logDebug:", "logTrace:". Or maybe it is better to split > log with levels: "self log info:", "self log debug:", "self log trace:" > I think that opens a can of worms. What Stef wants is a "say something" method that is easy to use and commonly useful. Adding logging levels is a specialized form of logging that is not commonly useful, it's just commonly used in less reflective environments. So my proposal would be to have an equivalent to "self log" where you can return your own logging facility on which you can do "self log info: 'something'". I changed my kind of logging some time ago. I just log objects. A log object isn't much more than to put it on top of a collection. While I'm not using strings for logging I have objects where I can attach all my use case dependent stuff. You could even put something like a log level information in those objects. I log Errors as well as progress state objects,etc. It is easy to process the whole log collection (now or afterwards) because all necessary state is still there. Another reason why I don't like strings for that is that I put the log messages as json in elasticsearch/mongo because I want to query them to find errornous behaviour. Well, sometimes I do both: Store it in a database and write it to disk. Because I don't convert it to a string at first possible time I can do that easily. We don't put sources in files so we shouldn't put log information only there. Make logging information a first class citizen! Norbert > Best regards, > Denis > > 2013/5/5 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.duca...@inria.fr> > Hi guys > > Stupidly I introduced log: a while ago to replace Transcript show:. Now is > the current situation. > > I still want to remove all the use of Transcript show: > > Now since I thought I did a mistake with log: because it overload > Integer>>log: I introduced trace: and traceCr: > > Now I do not like traceCr: because it is not a cool message. > > So what do we do: > > 1) we use crLog:, logCr: > and deprecated log: > > > 2) we use crTrace:, trace: and traceCr: > > I really prefer solution 1 but I would like to hear from you. > > Stef >
