On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 11:23:58AM +0200, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote: > On 12/21/2013 08:47 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote: > >On (20/12/13 18:15), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote: > >>Hi everyone, > >> > >>Please find attached the third version of the DEBUG macro refactoring > >>patchset. The second version was lost to the maillist message size limit, so > >>I'll list the changes from the first one: > >> > >> * level limiting condition moved to the macro as requested by Simo, > >> * macro definition update is separated from the invocation update, > >> * automatic macro invocation update is separated from the following > >> manual > >> fixups, > >> * invocations using the old debug level (number literals) are updated to > >> use the new bitmask macros, > >I am not really sure, whether we need to convert old debug levels to new > >debug > >levels with script. > > > >I don't remember what was the result in previous thread. > >Let's discuss about this point one more time. > > > >When I replaced some debug levels in the past, I had to change level, > >because it didn't fit the description from manual pages. > > > >man sssd.conf > > -> SERVICES SECTIONS > > -> General service configuration options > > -> debug_level > > > >I can see two options > >1. change debug level with Nikolai's script > > and occasionally update debug levels to the proper level > >2. Push patches without this part > > and continue with occasionally conversions > > The first option is better for the following reasons:
I mostly agree with Lukas, but per conversation on #sssd the other developers preferred to mass-change the debug logs and I don't want to block the patches because of this. > > 1. There are 2273 uses of the old levels, *half* of all DEBUG macro > invocations, so updating them on occasion will take a *long* time. > 2. Code is more often read than written (modified), and all this time > developers will be reading code using obscure numeric literals, which > take additional mental hop (effort) to comprehend. > 3. Spotting incorrect debug level will be easier with symbolic levels > instead of numeric ones and thus they're more likely to be corrected. Sorry, I disagree about 2) and 3). Maybe it's just how I work, but I've trained myself to convert any numeric constants I see in the code and just skip the SSSDBG_ unless I'm also touching the DEBUG macro for other reasons. _______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
