On Wednesday, July 06, 2011 01:14:37 Jie Zhang wrote: > +void urj_log_error (void); > +void urj_log_warning (void);
seems like these would be easy to confuse behavior wise with "urj_log()". so
if we tweak the name and merge your older idea, we could have:
urj_log_error_describe (level)
now that the message prefix issue is sorted out in the core, we dont need to
worry about that anymore.
also, in the comment above the func, note that it implicitly calls
urj_error_reset().
> + if (level == URJ_LOG_LEVEL_WARNING || level == URJ_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR)
> + {
> + r += log_printf (p, "%s: ", urj_log_level_string (level));
> + if (urj_log_state.level <= URJ_LOG_LEVEL_DETAIL)
> + r += log_printf (p, "%s:%i %s(): ", file, line, func);
> + }
i think this part should read:
if (level == URJ_LOG_LEVEL_WARNING || level == URJ_LOG_LEVEL_ERROR ||
urj_log_state.level <= URJ_LOG_LEVEL_DEBUG)
r += log_printf (p, "%s: ", urj_log_level_string (level));
if (urj_log_state.level <= URJ_LOG_LEVEL_DETAIL)
r += log_printf (p, "%s:%i %s(): ", file, line, func);
otherwise, rest looks fine
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2
_______________________________________________ UrJTAG-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/urjtag-development
