Re: [jboss-as7-dev] manual way to do logging?

Well, in looking at the way you do things, it is impossible to do manual logging. Sigh... So, at least I thought I could at least remove jboss logging as a binary dependency yet still use the processor to generate basic string constants based on included localization property files... BUT... There's a small bug (or maybe it is a feature) in that creating the message string is *ALWAYS* a string concatination if you have a message id: public final String jbossLoggingSucks() { String result = ((projectCode +"000102: ")+ jbossLoggingSucks$str()); return result; } When you fix that, let me know. On 6/8/12 4:11 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: > >> That's the crux really. I always bitch when I have to add a log message with JBoss logging compared to the good old log4j. But I would not meet the requirements. >> >> See it positively, it's annoying enough to add a log or throw an exception that I do it less often and my code is even more efficient :D >> The other annoying bit is when your log interface is in a common module and you work on a dependent module. This requires full recompilation and I am often bitten by this with method not found exceptions. > > Yes, same happened often in eclipse plugins - they tend to move the logging message/interfaces into each module and only > truly shared ones out in common. > > It's all a balance act. > > /max > >> >> On 8 juin 2012, at 09:44, Max Rydahl Andersen<max.andersen(a)redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> btw. yes, I also think jboss logging is over-engineered for basic usage but >>> for stuff that needs to be memory efficient and i18n maintainable I don't recall >>> seeing anything better.... >>> >>> On 08 Jun 2012, at 09:31, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Bill/David, >>>> >>>> I unfortunately cannot use JBoss Logging yet because of how Eclipse plugins are built, but >>>> just a few observations on this "fun" topic ;) >>>> >>>> Static vs non-static logging: >>>> ------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Eclipse plugins already are used to have to create a static string message in an interface to do i18n of logging; they even provide tooling to make this easy to do - that helps *alot*; >>>> jboss logging doesn't have that though. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately we actually in Eclipse world also have the non-interface based stuff too that Bill wants and yes its awesome you can just write it quick'n'dirty but maan its a mess to work with >>>> afterwards over time. (In resteasy you probably don't see it because its much smaller than the number of eclipse plugins we have to maintain, but if I could choose now, I would like >>>> to have that stick hit me everytime I was lazy) >>>> >>>> Hacker tip: Nothing prevents you from doing a generic highlevel interface field you can use everytime you are feeling lazy - good thing is you or others can easily find the usages of that >>>> and go through and convert these messages. just saying. >>>> >>>> Performance: >>>> ------------------- >>>> >>>> Jason and David aren't full of shit here. >>>> >>>> They proved early on in AS7 lifetime that even basic stuff in logging like checking if log is activated was costing as much as 10% overhead - even with logging disabled. That was before string concatenation gets into play. >>>> >>>> And if you don't trust them then I can tell you Eclipse went through the exact same exercise some years back. They had grown organically over time from a few small plugins to thousands. and suddenly they >>>> were faced with several hundred megabytes of overhead and a sluggish performance. Their move to use static interfaces made a big impact in runtime performance AND memory usage. >>>> >>>> JBoss Logging actually takes this even further - but i'll leave David and Jasons to explain those :) >>>> >>>> Usability: >>>> ------------- >>>> >>>> You do not need an additional maven plugin if you just use the plain standard annotation processor. >>>> You keep saying you need one so i'm curious why you think that. >>>> >>>> There is though one place where this annotation processor sucks, and that is that it isn't isolated >>>> enough to be reusable and runnable within an IDE such as Eclipse :) >>>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/LOGTOOL-51 captures that; this shouldn't affect you though since you >>>> are just using maven and vi. >>>> >>>> ....and I'm all for that beer too - can we talk about how JBoss Logging could be made to work with Eclipse logging framework ? :) >>>> >>>> /max >>>> >>>> On 08 Jun 2012, at 00:43, Bill Burke wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 6/7/12 6:21 PM, David M. Lloyd wrote: >>>>>> On 06/07/2012 04:55 PM, Bill Burke wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> P.S. I hope we can have a few beers at JUDCon/JBossWorld and *NOT* talk >>>>>>> about this. >>>>>> >>>>>> :-D >>>>>> >>>>>> Don't get me wrong, I'm not pissed or anything. I do love a good >>>>>> argument though. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Oh thank god! I love a good argument too! I don't know about you, but >>>>> sitting at home every day, you get a bit ornery.... >>>>> >>>>> I've exhausted my arguments anyways. Hopefully Jim can take the banner >>>>> and run with it... >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Bill Burke >>>>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat >>>>> http://bill.burkecentral.com >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> jboss-as7-dev mailing list >>>>> jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> jboss-as7-dev mailing list >>>> jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> jboss-as7-dev mailing list >>> jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev >