It's possible that macros and mocks don't work well together, though that's just a guess.
On 20 December 2017 at 00:00, Jeff Shaw <[email protected]> wrote: > I should add that manually testing it works. > > Sent from my phone > > > On Dec 20, 2017, at 12:45 AM, Jeffrey Shaw <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I added some tests for traced, but they don't pass. The mocks say, > "Actually, there were zero interactions with this mock." I could use some > help getting these two tests to work. > > > > https://github.com/shawjef3/logging-log4j-scala/blob/ > message-location/log4j-api-scala_2.12/src/test/scala/org/ > apache/logging/log4j/scala/LoggerTest.scala#L574 > > > >> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Jeffrey Shaw <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Thanks for the encouragement everyone! I never worked on an Apache > project before and had no idea what to expect from the community. > >> > >> I've made some progress. One cool thing I added was a `traced` method > (source), which does the work you'd want for traceEntry, traceExit, and > throwing. It would be cool to add catching as well, but that would require > tree traversal, which is beyond me at the moment. I also haven't figured > out how to add the parameter lists. Anyway, an example: > >> > >> before: > >> def f() = {...} > >> > >> after: > >> def f() = logger.traced(Level.INFO) {...} > >> > >>> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> From the little I've worked with macros (worked more with scalameta and > >>> shapeless), that looks good so far. If you can add some unit tests, > then > >>> we'd be happy to merge! > >>> > >>> On 11 December 2017 at 20:41, Jeffrey Shaw <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> > Great news! I'm able to run LoggingApp in the scala api repo without > it > >>> > calling StackLocatorUtil.calcLocation, but it prints the same > messages as > >>> > before. I have to use my patch to log4j of course. > >>> > > >>> > See https://github.com/shawjef3/logging-log4j-scala/commits/ > >>> > message-location > >>> > > >>> > On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > This sounds like it'd make a great addition to the Scala API! > >>> > > > >>> > > On 9 December 2017 at 15:36, Jeffrey Shaw <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > > > >>> > > > Ralph, I agree with you entirely. My intent for these new log > methods > >>> > is > >>> > > > that they only be called from compile-time generated code. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Ralph Goers < > >>> > [email protected]> > >>> > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > I don’t understand how this is a good idea. To use this you > would > >>> > need > >>> > > to > >>> > > > > do something like: > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Message msg = new StringMessage(getCaller(), “My Message”); > >>> > > > > logger.debug(msg); > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Unfortunately the line number would point to the line where > >>> > getCaller() > >>> > > > is > >>> > > > > called not to the logger statement. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > I had thought about modifying AbstractLogger to do > >>> > > > > public void debug(final Marker marker, final String message) { > >>> > > > > logIfEnabled(getCaller(), Level.DEBUG, marker, message, > >>> > (Throwable) > >>> > > > > null); > >>> > > > > } > >>> > > > > instead of the current > >>> > > > > public void debug(final Marker marker, final String message) { > >>> > > > > logIfEnabled(FQCN, Level.DEBUG, marker, message, > (Throwable) > >>> > null); > >>> > > > > } > >>> > > > > But the amount of changes required to get it into the LogEvent > was > >>> > > large. > >>> > > > > OTOH, if we create a CallerLocationMessage that contains the > >>> > > > > StackTraceElement and then have existing Messages extend that > then we > >>> > > > could > >>> > > > > store the location in the Message if it is a > CallerLocationMessage. > >>> > > > Calling > >>> > > > > getCaller() in this way would be much better since it is at a > fixed > >>> > > depth > >>> > > > > from the caller. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > With Java 9 this could become: > >>> > > > > public void debug(final Marker marker, final String message) { > >>> > > > > logIfEnabled(stackWalker.walk(s->s.skip(1).findFirst(), > >>> > > Level.DEBUG, > >>> > > > > marker, message, (Throwable) null); > >>> > > > > } > >>> > > > > although that would pass a StackFrame instead of a > StackTraceElement. > >>> > > The > >>> > > > > only problems with this is that there is still some overhead in > >>> > calling > >>> > > > > StackWalker like this. Also, if this is called from a facade, > such as > >>> > > > > log4j-slf4j-impl then the number of levels that have to be > skipped > >>> > > would > >>> > > > be > >>> > > > > different. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > I would really prefer if there was some way to capture the line > >>> > number > >>> > > > > information for the various loggers when the annotation > processor > >>> > runs > >>> > > at > >>> > > > > compile time. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > Ralph > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > On Dec 9, 2017, at 1:22 PM, Jeffrey Shaw <[email protected] > > > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > Thanks for the link, Mikael. I'll take a look at it. > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > I added some plumbing to core to allow clients to pass a > >>> > > > > StackTraceElement > >>> > > > > > to loggers. I'd like a code review. I'm happy to try other > methods. > >>> > > See > >>> > > > > the > >>> > > > > > following commit. > >>> > > > > > https://github.com/shawjef3/logging-log4j2/commit/ > >>> > > > > 9c42073e9ca4f25a2f4075b1791eee2893534c54 > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Mikael Ståldal < > [email protected]> > >>> > > > > wrote: > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > >> Have you tried the Log4j Scala API? > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > > >> http://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/manual/scala-api.html > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > > >> It does currently not support this, but it uses Scala > macros, and > >>> > > this > >>> > > > > >> could be added there. But log4j-api and/or log4j-core > probably > >>> > needs > >>> > > > to > >>> > > > > >> adapted as well. > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > > >> On 2017-12-09 07:30, Jeffrey Shaw wrote: > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > > >>> Hello, > >>> > > > > >>> I've found that I am able to use Scala macros to provide > >>> > > compile-time > >>> > > > > >>> source information for log messages. However, I don't see > a way > >>> > to > >>> > > > > inject > >>> > > > > >>> this into log4j's logging mechanism. > >>> > > > > >>> > >>> > > > > >>> I'm wondering if there is something I'm missing, or if > LogEvent's > >>> > > > > >>> getSource > >>> > > > > >>> method could be duplicated in Message. > >>> > > > > >>> > >>> > > > > >>> We could then have zero-overhead location information in > logs. > >>> > I'm > >>> > > > > >>> thinking > >>> > > > > >>> that tools other than Scala could also take advantage of > this. > >>> > > > > >>> > >>> > > > > >> > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > -- > >>> > > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Matt Sicker <[email protected]> > >> > > > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
