On 31/12/2014 11:16, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
:
I guess something like "// 8028357 removed old, inefficient debug
logging" in place of the DEBUG declaration in each affected file
wouldn't be too busy and also give future maintainers a handle to this
changeset and thus this discussion. Would that suffice?
Sounds good.
This looks a bit odd to me. If you just want to communicate that the
class doesn't have logging for performance reasons then I think that
should be stated in a comment without reference to removed code.
-Alan.
