On 10/30/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


>     1) The Logging Debate That Won't Die - we don't want to encumber our
>     "production" code with logging or even with runtime enablement
checks
>     for logging i.e.
>
>           if (logging.isDebugEnabled())
>
>     but it's clear that some people still want to use it for debugging.
>
>
> Just a small idea: Let teach JIT to purge this code unless special
option is ON
> ? Doing this we solve performance issue at least .

Well, then we have a classlibrary that is only good for use with JIT's
that have been specially trained to find code that looks like very
common code for logging implementations.

The results could be hilarious, actually.


More advanced version of the proposal above. I do not say it's ideal but it
solves IDE incompatibility problem of solution with preprocessor.

We can create a special class (Configuration) with final static fields:
public static final boolean isLogEnabled
public static final boolean isJava1_5
public static final boolean isJava1_6

And check these vars in classlib code. Does performance the question? I
think not, we will drop this code during the compilation and this is an easy
task for any JIT.

The only problem is you can't add new methods in a such way. So it's a clean
but not complete solution :(


--
Mikhail Fursov

Reply via email to