Re: [log4perl-devel] requesting feedback on Log::Abstract

[Jonathan S. <sw...@po...>]

>> The  problem I have with the DEBUG etc keywords is that they promote
>> inefficient behavior. e.g.
>>
>>      DEBUG "Current arguments: " . Dumper(\@_);
>>
>> will take the performance hit for Dumper() even when debug logging
>> isn't turned on.
>
> Sure, although I don't see how
>
>     $log->debug("Current arguments: " . Dumper(\@_));
>
> is any different.

It isn't different, by itself, but it translates naturally into

     $log->debug("Current arguments: " . Dumper(\@_)) if $log->is_debug;

whereas if you start off in easy mode, you don't have any way to get  
at the logger (as far as I can tell).

> By the way, in Log4perl you can pass a subroutine ref
> to the method, which eliminates the problem:
>
>     DEBUG sub { "Current arguments: " . Dumper(\@_) };
>

Right, I forgot about the subroutine syntax. I do think that is a  
little harder for novices, and a little more expensive, than the  
conditional (especially when the conditional is against a simple  
scalar).

To be honest I have other problems with porting the DEBUG etc  
keywords into a generic, universally acceptable API. The all-caps is  
not in line with Perl standards, and it interferes with  
Carp::Assert's DEBUG. It also introduces a second, less-powerful API  
that isn't trivial to convert to the primary API when you need more  
features. IMHO it is better to just provide users with an easy way to  
create the default logger, and then maintain a single powerful OO  
API. My two cents.

Jon