Hi, I tried it, it seems to be working. Expect a patch soon, along the lines of your proposal.
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:18 AM, Alex Rousskov <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/05/2012 05:25 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote: >> On 06.11.2012 04:19, Alex Rousskov wrote: >>> My current preference is to change debugs() to use HERE when the >>> surrounding code has to be changed anyway OR when there is a good reason >>> to add HERE to that specific debugs() line. >>> >>> Long-term, we should consider making HERE in debugs() at level 2 or >>> higher an automatic/default behavior. This will require some work, but I >>> think it is possible, and I think it can even accommodate existing >>> debugs() statements (with or without HERE) _without_ changing them. > > >> Me too. If you are agreeing on that then it is a 1 line change to add >> HERE every level 2+ ... and thousands of lines to remove cruft. > > I would just not do the "remove explicit HERE" part to avoid changing > thousands of lines that do not really need to be touched. New and > changed code will not be allowed to use HERE in debugs(2+). Old code can > continue to use it. > > For this plan to work, we would need to #define HERE to be something > that does not log anything and that does it fast. For example, "" will > work but there ought to be faster alternatives. I recommend trying an > inlined stream manipulator that will be completely optimized out. > > > HTH, > > Alex. > -- /kinkie
