[MonoDevelop] Fwd: Logging revisited

[Christian Hergert]

Missed the list.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Christian Hergert <christian.hergert at gmail.com>
Date: Jul 1, 2007 2:03 AM
Subject: Re: [MonoDevelop] Logging revisited
To: Jacob Ilsø Christensen <jacobilsoe at gmail.com>


I had this feature, almost identical to your code, back in the initial
implementation phase. We decided against it because it requires
checking the StackFrame (like you do on patch line 18). I think the
general consensus was that this is generally bad depending on
velocities of logging or what-have-you.

That being said, I'm not necessarily against it either ;-)

-- Christian

On 7/1/07, Jacob Ilsø Christensen <jacobilsoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/1/07, Christian Hergert <christian.hergert at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I hate to say it, being that I did the original implementation of the
> > logging, but I am a fan of doing the logging via log4net directly
> > rather than through the proxy as we have now. I can understand it
> > might be moot for something like this, but for server apps, its a
> > godsend to have the reconfigurability of what gets logged, where, and
> > how.
>
> Yes, I like direct logging via log4net better too. But at least my
> patch lets you know where the log came from instead of always
> ILoggingService, so now you can actually do per type configuration.
> The where and the how is still possible with the current
> implementation or am I misunderstanding something?
>
> >
> > Food for thought,
> >
> > -- Christian
> >
> > On 6/30/07, Jacob Ilsø Christensen <jacobilsoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > This patch is better.
> > >
> > > On 6/30/07, Jacob Ilsø Christensen <jacobilsoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi.
> > > >
> > > > Some time ago there was some discussion about MonoDevelop's use of
> > > > log4net. Right now all logging seems to come from ILoggingService due
> > > > to:
> > > >
> > > > LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(ILoggingService));
> > > >
> > > > in DefaultLoggingService. This is not very informative. I have
> > > > attached a patch which looks at the stacktrace to attempt to determine
> > > > the calling type. It is rather hardcoded right now, but works for a
> > > > debug build (a release build might invalidate it due to e.g. inline
> > > > method optimizations) of MonoDevelop. To make it more accurate it
> > > > could be changed to traverse the stacktrace until a type different
> > > > from ILoggingService was found.
> > > >
> > > > Is this patch ok or should it be changed to traverse the stack for the
> > > > calling type? Or do we want log4net dependencies in all classes that
> > > > need logging?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Jacob
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Monodevelop-list mailing list
> > > Monodevelop-list at lists.ximian.com
> > > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/monodevelop-list
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>