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

I know you think that's a good thing but it's really not. We write software to accomplish a goals that meet the needs of our users over our own personal enjoyment (and by users i mean the priority is on the ones that see the log messages, not the ones that write them) Apparently you prefer the opposite. On Jun 9, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Bill Burke <bburke(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > I'll rephrase that...Being a dick requires no effort from me. :) > > On 6/9/12 11:33 AM, Bill Burke wrote: >> Yes, I'll spend 10x the effort just to be a dick :) >> >> On 6/9/12 11:26 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote: >>> Yet you'll expend 10x the effort bitching and moaning? That seems >>> incongruous to me. >>> >>> On 06/09/2012 10:12 AM, Bill Burke wrote: >>>> Not gonna bother filing a bug, because I ain't gonna use it. >>>> >>>> On 6/9/12 10:58 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote: >>>>> 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&lt;max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > 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