harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mikhail Fursov" <mike.fur...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Preprocessor (was Re: [classlib][rmi] Code smell - Thread.sleep() in ActivationGroup method)
Date Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:55:53 GMT
On 10/29/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
> 1) The Logging Debate That Won't Die - we don't want to encumber our
> "production" code with logging or even with runtime enablement checks
> for logging i.e.
>       if (logging.isDebugEnabled())
> but it's clear that some people still want to use it for debugging.

Just a small idea: Let teach JIT to purge this code unless special option is ON
? Doing this we solve performance issue at least .

If we did this, I assume that our build becomes a two step process,
> first pre-process the code to create  separate "buildable source", which
> would go into source jars and such for debugging purposes.  Then our
> current javac/jar process.
> I'd also like to be able to work in an IDE with the pre-proc stuff
> invisible if possible...

This is the main problem. Backporting of your changes from the "buildable
source" to the "source with preprocessor" could have more overhead then
support of a separate branch for different Java version.

Mikhail Fursov

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message