3 Jan 2005 08:25
Re: stacktrace information logger patch...
Kevin A. Burton <burton <at> newsmonster.org>
2005-01-03 07:25:10 GMT
2005-01-03 07:25:10 GMT
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
>
> Hi Kevin,
>
> My comments below are entirely based on the use case where you have a
> log statement indicating some method, say X, was called. However, you
> do not know how, why or who called X. That is where your %stacktrace
> word comes into play.
>
> Your current contribution is a good step forward but not entirely
> sufficient to address the above use case. If you use the long form,
> since all logging output will contain a stacktrace, your log output
> will be long and verbose making it hard to decipher. If you use
> the short form, the log output will be easier to read. However, a
> single
> line of stack trace may not be enough to clearly understand the chain
> of events resulting in the invocation of X. You need more slack with
> more lines of stack.
Well I agree.. I think I even noted this in the source if you read all
the comments ;)
Here's what I said inline:
> //NOTE: when option is an integer here we could just return
> this many
> //lines. As an example you could have %stacktrace{5} and only
> return 5
> //lines of the stack.
(Continue reading)
When I open the Arguments pane, as you told me to do,
appears selected an option that says:
Use default working directory
If I deselect that checkbox, appears this:
${workspace_loc:AplicacionSEMC}
Is this OK? I tryed both options but none worked. What
could you recommend me?
Thanks a lot,
Johnny
--- Curt Arnold <carnold <at> apache.org> escribió:
RSS Feed