On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 08:57:56 +0200 Michael Welle <mwe012008@gmx.net> wrote: > Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> writes: > [...] > > debug output should certainly not be output by default in released > > versions without a command-line or configuration option turning it > > on. > > > > l for one don't want ls doing something like this: > > > > ls: starting up > > ls: checking for bad filesystems > > ls: searching for files in /home/foo/some/path > > foo bar/ baz/ > > ls: 1 file found > > ls: 2 directories found > thank you for this brilliant example, but please add to the output how > much time the steeps consumed ;). Debug output, to be useful, must take as little time as possible. This is particularly important when considering bugs in programs using threads and thread-locking or trying (possibly wrongly) to use file-locking. > My feeling is that many developers > don't care because most users might not be aware of what is happening. That is a very cavalier attitude to how developers manage their software. If you have any basis for that accusation I suggest you be open and name names. > They may start the application by mouse clicking and so they don't > know about stdout and stderr. Users may but developers will be looking for that debug output and starting the program from the command line explicitly to be able to collect it. (Filing a bug will usually result in the user being asked to start the program from the command line too.) -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/
Attachment:
pgpMfFIahQBXE.pgp
Description: PGP signature