On Jan 13, 11:53 pm, Stuart Halloway stuart.hallo...@gmail.com
wrote:
I would like for logging to be less magical in its implementation.
I don't see the leveraging of macro evalutaion to be magic; I view
it as a great advantage of clojure to not be limited to only compile-
time and
I would like for logging to be less magical in its implementation.
I don't see the leveraging of macro evalutaion to be magic; I view
it as a great advantage of clojure to not be limited to only compile-
time and run-time (given the recent AOTC-compatibility demands, not
everyone agrees).
Hi,
GOSUB raised this on IRC and I'm stumped as to the behavior, can
anyone help shed some light?
In order to reproduce he provided a leiningen project:
http://github.com/ghoseb/test-logging
Now running a REPL from those dependencies (note you can just run lein
deps; lein repl I am just
This behaviour might occur due to an old Apache Commons-Logging JAR,
several of which have had classpath / class-loading issues. Just a
thought.
Regards,
Shantanu
On Jan 12, 5:13 pm, Timothy Pratley timothyprat...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
GOSUB raised this on IRC and I'm stumped as to the
On Tuesday 12 January 2010 07:30 PM, Shantanu Kumar wrote:
This behaviour might occur due to an old Apache Commons-Logging JAR,
several of which have had classpath / class-loading issues. Just a
thought.
Which is the recommended latest version of log4j? As I can see, 2.0 is
too experimental
We have been using 1.2.14 for more than a year without any glitches yet.
Luc
On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 23:22 +0530, Baishampayan Ghose wrote:
On Tuesday 12 January 2010 07:30 PM, Shantanu Kumar wrote:
This behaviour might occur due to an old Apache Commons-Logging JAR,
several of which have
Without looking too deeply, I think this is an issue with AOT
compiling. As the c.c.logging docs note, the logging impl is chosen
at macro-expansion-time. If contrib is fully AOTC'd, then that's when
the logging impl will be chosen. There's an assembla ticket on it:
Is the performance impact of a runtime function call so critical for
logging that we need to do this at macro-expansion-time? I would like
for logging to be less magical in its implementation.
Stu
Without looking too deeply, I think this is an issue with AOT
compiling. As the c.c.logging
Is the performance impact of a runtime function call so critical for
logging that we need to do this at macro-expansion-time? I would
like for logging to be less magical in its implementation.
I think Alex's goal was to approach the near-zero cost of Java logging
implementations when
On Jan 12, 2:16 pm, Stuart Halloway stuart.hallo...@gmail.com wrote:
Is the performance impact of a runtime function call so critical for
logging that we need to do this at macro-expansion-time?
Yes, insofar as I don't want performance impact to discourage people
from peppering their code with
On Jan 12, 10:52 pm, Baishampayan Ghose b.gh...@ocricket.com wrote:
On Tuesday 12 January 2010 07:30 PM, Shantanu Kumar wrote:
This behaviour might occur due to an old Apache Commons-Logging JAR,
several of which have had classpath / class-loading issues. Just a
thought.
Which is the
11 matches
Mail list logo
