axis-c-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Hawkins <>
Subject Re: Trace
Date Thu, 05 Aug 2004 11:15:33 GMT

+1 that was the solution we came up with a few minutes after me sending
this note :-)

John Hawkins
AspectX Architect,
C web services client dev.

+44 (0) 1962 817131

             Samisa Abeysinghe                                             
   >                                               To 
                                       Apache AXIS C Developers List       
             05/08/2004 11:53          <>          
             Please respond to                                     Subject 
              "Apache AXIS C           Re: Trace                           
             Developers List"                                              

Sounds good to me.

As the method body of 'trace' is excuted only if the trace option is set
this would not be a
problem for individual cases.
However, depending on how often the method is called, there could be a
performance hit. (but may
be this is negligible at times)

To let those who wish to go without the trace at all, we could use both the
dynamic and static
options in combination. (i.e. have both compiler option and conf file


--- John Hawkins <> wrote:

> Hi Folks,
> More observations and questions -
> We are currently trying to track down a problem and therefore require
> trace. This made us look at trace !
> 1) Trace seems to be used mainly for error messages rather than e.g.
> tracing entry and exit of methods - Fair enough.
> 2) Dynamic versus static initialisation of trace: Trace is currently a
> compile time option. This is not really very good for dealing with a
> customer situation where I can't really expect them to stop their system
> and start it again with a different version of our libraries. We have
> looked at trace code and concluded that it would be reasonably simple to
> put in the conf file a flag to say whether you wanted trace on or not.
> would mean that the trace methods would always be called but the trace
> object (AxisTrace) would look at the flag and consider whether to
> do anything or not e.g.
> AxisTrace::trace(...)
> {
>        if(traceOn)
>       {
>             tracestuff
>       }
> }
> Now, I understand that calling a method when you might do nothing in it
> not great but that's why I pointed out that really trace is not really
> blown trace rather we use it more as an error message writer. In which
> the trace is only used when something goes wrong and thus no performance
> overhead in the main line of code.
> Any thoughts - if not then we'll go ahead and implement the changes asap.
> thankyou,
> John.

Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

View raw message