[PD-dev] unifying loglevels

[Christof Ressi]

> for unknown reasons, the values accepted by verbose() and logpost() 
> have an offset. 
Why? Oh why?

I have to admit I only checked with verbose() (which is used extensively 
in the Pd source code) and naively assumed that logpost() would work the 
same...

Here's a possible solution:

If we let PD_CRITICAL start at 5 (or even higher), then both verbose() 
and logpost() can differentiate between the old and the new log levels 
and add the respective offsets.

if (loglevel >= PD_CRITICAL) {
     // new log level
} else {
     // old log level
}

Since people would just use the enum values, they don't have to care 
about the actual numeric values anyway. I know, it is not aesthetically 
pleasing, but it would solve the issue at hand.

Christof

On 24.08.2021 15:59, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> TL;DR i'd like to propose to unify the loglevels as used by verbose() 
> and logpost()
>
>
> for unknown reasons, the values accepted by verbose() and logpost() 
> have an offset.
>
> the current loglevels are like this:
>
> logpost(x, 0,...) -> CRITICAL
> logpost(x, 1,...) -> ERROR
> logpost(x, 2,...) -> NORMAL
> logpost(x, 3,...) -> DEBUG
> logpost(x, 4,...) -> extra VERBOSE
>
> verbose(-3,...) -> CRITICAL
> verbose(-2,...) -> ERROR
> verbose(-1,...) -> NORMAL
> verbose(0,...) -> DEBUG
> verbose(1,...) -> extra VERBOSE
>
> for Pd-0.52, christof has created an enum to use labels that are 
> easier to read and understand (PD_CRITICAL, PD_ERROR, PD_NORMAL, 
> PD_DEBUG, PD_VERBOSE).
> to add a bit of confusion, this enum is called "t_loglevel" but 
> actually declares values that are usable by verbose() rather than 
> logpost()
>
> i would like to have both logpost() and verbose() use the same values 
> (which should be aliased via the "t_loglevel" enum).
>
>
> unfortunately, both methods are used by (a few) externals, so unifying 
> the levels will change the verbosity of these externals.
>
> my gut feeling tells me, that i would prefer the current behaviour or 
> logpost() (with the most severe loglevel starting at 0, rather than 
> some negative value).
> alternatively, i think that a loglevel=0 should be the verbosity of 
> [print] (aka NORMAL). however, this would change the verbosity of 
> *all* libraries using any of verbose() or loglevel().
>
> to see how bad a change would be, i've tried to check how many 
> externals are actually using any of the two functions:
>
> and luckily, there are not that many externals involved.
>
> these results are based on externals i found on my harddisk
>
> * externals using `verbose()`
> - zexy: mostly uses verbose(1) to report errors
> - iemguts (canvasdelete, autoabstraction): only calls verbose() once!
> - triggerize-plugin, doublechord-plugin: uses verbose(10), which is 
> "extra verbose" in all scenarios, so can be ignored)
> - mediasettings
> - hexloader
> - Gem
> - ggee (shell): uses verbose(4) which is always "extra verbose"
> - hcs (folderlist)
> - tclpd
> - vstplugin~
>
> * externals using `logpost()`
> - hcs (ce_path, folder_list, passwd, helppath, classpath, stat, group, 
> colorpanel)
> - vbap
> - iemnet
> - iemmatrix: only extra VERBOSE
> - maxlib: only extra VERBOSE
> - unauthorized: only extra VERBOSE
> - libdir: only DEBUG and above
> - mrpeach (midifile, tcpclient): only DEBUG
> - lua: only DEBUG
> - tclpd: only DEBUG
> - cyclone: original version uses only extra VERBOSE; porres' version 
> doesn't use logpost() at all
> - creb
> - smlib
> - log
>
> i'm sure i missed many libraries, but i checked quite a few.
>
>
> anyhow:
>
> changing the levels used by verbose() to be "0"-based will make 
> externals (that use verbose()) more chatty.
> however, afaict, Gem and vstplugin~ are the only libraries in wide use 
> where this might actually become an issue. and i guess "vstplugin~" is 
> being actively enough developed to fix the problem by just pushing out 
> a new version.
>
> otoh, changing the levels used by logpost() to be "-3"-based will make 
> externals (that use logpost()) less chatty.
> in general this shouldn't be a big deal (as people can always raise 
> the verbosity to see these messages).
> in particular, many libraries using logpost() are very quiet anyhow 
> (using DEBUG or extra VERBOSE), so there won't be that much change.
>
>
> what do you think?
>
>
> fdasr
> IOhannes
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at lists.iem.at
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20210824/a18e1d55/attachment.htm>