Added option to turn off logger #2366
Conversation
Signed-off-by: avifenesh <aviarchi1994@gmail.com>
avifenesh
force-pushed
the
Logger/turnOff
branch
from
76e0e4c
to
6f8c2c3
Compare
| @@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ public enum Level | |||
| Warn = 1, | |||
| Info = 2, | |||
| Debug = 3, | |||
| Trace = 4 | |||
| Trace = 4, | |||
| Off = 5, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: I think it's more common to use "Disabled"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the built-in naming of the rust logging library we use, I want to keep it consistent
| @@ -28,13 +28,13 @@ | |||
| public final class Logger { | |||
| @Getter | |||
| public enum Level { | |||
| DISABLED(-2), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why changing it and not using the existing code? setting disabled with -2 allows you to use if (!(level.getLevel() <= loggerLevel.getLevel())) { in the log function without checking specifically if logger.Off
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the log, it was already existing the specific check.
In the other, I don't want to check, and I want it to be consistent over all clients. “Special” implantation for one language are not a thing we do. The disabled in java only was supposed to be blocked when it was created so it is implemented for all clients, as I do now, even if the request to fix is for ts only.
Adding a negative number will bring major changes to all other clients, and I think consistency is better than one less if.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And about naming, the tracing crate we use, use off so I want to be consistent.
| if (level == Level.DISABLED) { | ||
| if (level == Level.OFF) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As said, it was already there as you see, but even if not, answered above.
avifenesh
force-pushed
the
Logger/turnOff
branch
from
f84f03e
to
a85c806
Compare
Signed-off-by: avifenesh <aviarchi1994@gmail.com>
avifenesh
force-pushed
the
Logger/turnOff
branch
from
a85c806
to
95a27ef
Compare
Added OFF option to logger