Chintana Wilamuna wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Ruwan Janapriya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
AXIS2_DEBUG_MSG(env->log, "[Project XYZ] Debug Message Tik Tak Too");
also the above macro name AXIS2_DEBUG_MSG is open for better (short) name
suggestions. Since the env->log part has the information that we are going
to "log" I removed "LOG" part from the macro name.
How about AXIS2_LOG_DEBUG_MSG(env, "my log message")?
Inside the macro definition you could provide the prefix
automatically. To me that seems a little cleaner than giving the log
member of the env struct and the prefix.
You don't have to replace the existing macro, instead I think you
could introduce the new macro and mark the existing one as
"deprecated" in the documentation and advocate usage of the new macro.
That way the existing programs won't break (at least, as Samisa said
until there's a change to the major version number).
some devs, gave more suggestions to get rid of "[Project XYZ] from each and
every line, and have it defined at the beginning of the project. And the new
proposed macro can use that define to concatenate with the user log message,
before logging it.
You could have a define directive, say PREFIX for each and every
project. In Axis2/C you define it to be "Axis2/C". When it comes to,
say, Rampart, you undef it and define it to have "Rampart". So the
macro will get the correct prefix regardless of which project the
macro is being used.
+1. But when it comes to submodule prefix, could this be a problem? Say
I need to use prefix
[rampart][oxs] for OMXMLSecurity and
[rampart][util] for Utility module etc.
Would that be a big issue if we give the freedom of passing the prefix?
Cheers,
Kau
Bye,
-Chintana
--
http://blog.kaushalye.org/
http://wso2.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
