Avoiding performance overhead for disabled logging levels
Arvydas Silanskas
(03 Nov 2020 20:05 UTC)
|
Re: Avoiding performance overhead for disabled logging levels Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (03 Nov 2020 21:56 UTC)
|
Re: Avoiding performance overhead for disabled logging levels
Alex Shinn
(04 Nov 2020 04:18 UTC)
|
Re: Avoiding performance overhead for disabled logging levels
Göran Weinholt
(07 Nov 2020 15:04 UTC)
|
Re: Avoiding performance overhead for disabled logging levels
Arvydas Silanskas
(25 Dec 2020 18:29 UTC)
|
Re: Avoiding performance overhead for disabled logging levels
Göran Weinholt
(27 Dec 2020 22:25 UTC)
|
Re: Avoiding performance overhead for disabled logging levels Marc Nieper-WiÃkirchen 03 Nov 2020 21:56 UTC
I agree that such a thing would be helpful. One way to solve it is to make the main logging procedure a special form, which then only evaluates most arguments when the severity argument is low enough. On the other hand, SRFI 215 says that it is a middle-level logging system, so the above functionality could also be implemented at a higher level that builds upon this SRFI. Am Di., 3. Nov. 2020 um 22:18 Uhr schrieb Arvydas Silanskas <xxxxxx@gmail.com>: > > Debug level logs tend to be very verbose (frequent and/or big message output) and rarely enabled. As such, it's desirable for logs to not only be not printed when that level of logging isn't enabled, but for its message / data to not be even calculated or allocated (http://www.slf4j.org/faq.html#logging_performance). I don't have a strong opinion on how this should be implemented, but I think it's a point that is definitely worth thinking about in this srfi. > > Arvydas