[PD-dev] unifying loglevels

Christof Ressi info at christofressi.com
Wed Aug 25 12:17:36 CEST 2021

> and you have a mix of old-style and new-style loglevels in use. 
Yeah, that's a general problem we can't really avoid.

Here's another suggestion:

Since logpost() really supersedes verbose(), we could allow t_loglevel 
to be only used with the former (with PD_CRITICAL = 0), but not with the 
latter. We just have to add an appropriate comment, e.g.

/* possible log levels for logpost(). NOTE: don't use with verbose()! */

enum t_loglevel { ... };

This would have the nice side effect of nudging people to use logpost() 
over verbose() for trackable printing.

Existing externals continue to work as expected and everybody is happy.


On 25.08.2021 11:19, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
> On 8/25/21 11:13 AM, Dan Wilcox wrote:
>> Sounds good to me.
>> I would suggest considering a compatibility mode / compile time 
>> option to preserve existing functionality for 
> right, i was thinking about suggesting to use "-compatibility" for 
> retaining backward compat.
> otoh. this doesn't help at all once externals start using the new 
> scheme and you have a mix of old-style and new-style loglevels in use.
> fgmasrd
> 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/20210825/a033ece2/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pd-dev mailing list