New submission from Lluís llpam...@pamies.cat:
One of the problems with the logging library is that it can affect code
performance when logging calls are over-utilized.
One possible solution would be to allow the compiler to remove logging calls
when code is optimized with python -O by
Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com added the comment:
assert logging.debug(This is a test.) or True
--
nosy: +storchaka
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14868
___
Lluís llpam...@pamies.cat added the comment:
storchaka, you're right, but since non of the debug(), info() etc. functions
have a return value, it would cause no trouble and would be neater to add a
return True. I'm not sure, but probably also more efficient.
--
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
I would also, however, not be a typical Python coding pattern. Functions
normally return None by default. The 'assertor True' pattern makes it
reasonably clear what the intent is, which just having logging return True
would not,
Lluís llpam...@pamies.cat added the comment:
David, the problem is that if you have the logging inside a loop, the
interpreter will have to evaluate the condition every time. With an assert you
guarantee that *no code* is executed.
I know that we can find thousands of ways to do that, even
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:
I was definitely wrong about the obvious part, then. The 'if __debug__:'
idiom is completely optimized away by -O, just like asserts are. That is, in
-O mode, there is no if test, the code block is just omitted entirely.
Having said
Lluís llpam...@pamies.cat added the comment:
Thanks for the explanation, I didn't know of the exact behavior of __debug__.
I close ticket.
--
resolution: - works for me
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
