For the garbage problem, can't you just use a StringBuilder there to
avoid that? For instance:
Log.Debug(new StringBuilder("My name is[").append(name).append("].");
-----Original Message-----
From: Jaroslaw Kowalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2005 10:12 AM
To: Log4NET User
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Log4Net only for the committed techies
Hi Ron,
Some answers to your questions inside:
> Which leads me to believe that people often use less than 3
> placeholders. Do people really use 10 or 15 placeholders at a time?
> Yuck. I don't think there's anything wrong with this:
>
> log.Debug("My name is [" + name + "].");
The problem is: garbage. When you write the code above you'll have at
least
one (perhaps two) memory allocations.
This code:
log.Debug("My name is [{0}].", name)
has zero memory allocation for non-logging case. This can be very useful
in
tight loops. With log4net you have to comment out your logging code.
With
NLog there's no need to do that - you just disable the Debug level for
particular logger and you're done.
NLog is optimized for one placeholder (zero-garbage) but in the future
this
may be changed to support more than one parameter.
To do the same with log4net efficiently you'd have to:
if (log.IsDebugAllowed)
{
log.Debug("My name is [" + name + "].");
}
>> LogLevel level = LogLevel.Debug;
>>
>> logger.Log(level, "aaaa");
>
> Is this high level programmer? I'd be curious where this may be
> useful. I see it as another local variable that I need to keep track
> of.
It may be useful when you're wrapping NLog with some other logging
layer,
which is not so uncommon. Otherwise you'd have to use a switch:
switch (...)
{
case Debug: log.Debug(...); break;
case Error: log.Error(...); break;
case Fatal: log.Fatal(...); break;
case Info: log.Info(...); break;
...
}
Jarek
