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

File bugs here: http://issues.jboss.org/browse/LOGTOOL On 06/09/2012 09:27 AM, Bill Burke wrote: > 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 >> >