[MonoDevelop] Fwd: Logging revisited

[Lluis Sanchez]

El dg 01 de 07 del 2007 a les 02:03 -0700, en/na Christian Hergert va
escriure:
> 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.

Yep, I don't like the idea of checking the stack frame at every log
call, I feel it may be slow. However, I don't have any real data. Maybe
you could do some tests?

> 
> 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Monodevelop-list mailing list
> Monodevelop-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/monodevelop-list