Review request: 8011380: FX dependency on PlatformLogger broken

[Laurent Bourgès]

Mandy,

I agree it should be well known; but I fixed several cases in awt/net code
where isLoggable() calls were missing.

I think it is quite cheap to remind good practices in the PlatformLogger /
jul Logger javadoc ...

PS: maybe some quality control tools could check such missing tests (PMD
can do it)...

I believe this was mentioned somewhere in j.u.logging.  A better solution
> may be to take java.util.function.Supplier parameter that constructs the
> log message lazily (see
> http://download.java.net/jdk8/docs/api/java/util/logging/Logger.html#fine(java.util.function.Supplier).
> I can file a RFE to investigate the use of Supplier as in j.u.l.Logger.
>

Very interesting feature, but I am still not aware of such JDK 8 features
(lambda) ... it seems nice but maybe the syntax will be more complicated /
verbose than our usual log statements:
log.fine(""...)

Laurent


>
> On 4/5/2013 1:55 AM, Laurent Bourgès wrote:
>
> Mandy,
>
> I would like to add few performance advices in the PlatformLogger Javadoc:
> "
> NOTE: For performance reasons, PlatformLogger usages should take care of
> avoiding useless / wasted object creation and method calls related to *
> disabled* log statements:
> Always use isLoggable(level) wrapping logs at levels (FINEST, FINER, FINE,
> CONFIG):
>
> Bad practices:
> - string concat:
>     log.fine("message" + value); // means
> StringBuilder(message).append(String.valueOf(value)).toString(): 2 objects
> created and value.toString() called
> - varags:
>     log.fine("message {0}", this); // create an Object[]
>
> Best practices:
> if (log.isLoggable(PlatformLogger.FINE) {
>     log.fine("message" + value);
> }
>
> if (log.isLoggable(PlatformLogger.FINE) {
>     log.fine("message {0}", this);
> }
> "
>
> What is your opinion ?
>
> Thanks for the given explanations and I hope that this patch will be
> submitted soon to JDK8 repository.
>
> Laurent
>
>