-Original Message-
From: Craig R. McClanahan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 7:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TC4.0] Disabling debug output...
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Jonathan Reichhold wrote:
This hack definitely works. As long as you're willing to pay
On Wed, 18 Jul 2001, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 12:16:27AM +0100, Pier P. Fumagalli wrote:
Checking out the source code, I see a lot of // (commented out lines) when
debug() is supposed to be called...
Can't we have a global constant boolean called DEBUG and
Craig R. McClanahan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In trivial experiments a long while back, I seem to recall that this trick
worked if your constant was static final. But I haven't looked lately.
Yep... Setting a public static final boolean DEBUG = true/false; will behave
like an ifdef in C
I believe the Java Language Spec makes specific requirements on the
order of evaluation of static finals to facilitate this kind of usage. In
the past I have
gone so far as to compile test programs and disassemble the byte code
and on every JVM I have ever tried, code wrapped in if statements
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Mark Abbott wrote:
[snip]
These are specifically the sort of problems the new java.util.logging
package in
JDK 1.4 is addressing. I believe the philosophy there is to always leave the
code in place, be liberal in writing tracing log calls and assume that
integer
Craig R. McClanahan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- However, Pier's proposed approach doesn't deal with a need that I've
experienced regularly -- the need to turn on debugging messages
dynamically on an existing component, *without* recompiling it. This
is NOT simply aesthetics; either you
stuff
like this on/off, but it is a relatively quick
hack...
Jonathan
- Original Message -
From: Pier P. Fumagalli [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [TC4.0] Disabling debug output...
Craig R. McClanahan at [EMAIL PROTECTED
: [TC4.0] Disabling debug output...
Craig R. McClanahan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- However, Pier's proposed approach doesn't deal with a need that I've
experienced regularly -- the need to turn on debugging messages
dynamically on an existing component, *without* recompiling
This hack definitely works. As long as you're willing to pay the overhead
for the method call, it's essentially equivalent to asking Log4J whether
or not debugging output is enabled, which does something similar (but asks
the instantiated logger object, instead of being a static method).
On Thu, 19 Jul 2001, Jonathan Reichhold wrote:
This hack definitely works. As long as you're willing to pay the overhead
for the method call, it's essentially equivalent to asking Log4J whether
or not debugging output is enabled, which does something similar (but asks
the instantiated
Craig wrote:
- The typical approach with the JSR47 API or with Log4J is to let the
logger decide whether to really output the message or not. So, you
would instrument your code with things like (conceptual, not real API):
logger.log(The object is + myObject, Logger.DEBUG);
On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 01:43:32PM -0700, Jonathan Reichhold wrote:
Actually I've got a thought on how to add in debug messages without recompiling.
For a horrible hack say I've got a java class
like:
//Constants.java
public class Constants{
public static boolean isDebug(){return
Checking out the source code, I see a lot of // (commented out lines) when
debug() is supposed to be called...
Can't we have a global constant boolean called DEBUG and replace the // with
if (DEBUG), so that we can simply compile in and out the debugging
information without touching the sources?
Check out org.apache.catalina.connector.warp.Constants and
WarpLogger... Old
trick we used in JServ. :)
Is Log4j not a good idea? I've used it for a couple of months, seems pretty
cool =) Too much for TC?
- r
Rob S. at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Check out org.apache.catalina.connector.warp.Constants and
WarpLogger... Old
trick we used in JServ. :)
Is Log4j not a good idea? I've used it for a couple of months, seems pretty
cool =) Too much for TC?
I believe the integration with Log4J is
15 matches
Mail list logo
