On Son, 19 Dez 1999, David Faure wrote:

> > nana can also do simple debug output. kdebug is just a subset of nana IIUC. 
> Once again, it's not a subset since nana doesn't have debug areas.

Why do we need debug areas when nana remembers file and line number of where
the debug statement is? This is simpler and still more informative imho. 
For kdebug you have to "allocate" a area number and use (read: remember and
type) that wherever I just want to have a short debug output. 

In addition when I actually want to find
the place where a debug message has come from, I have to grep
the whole sourcetree or guess where it might be. I don't have time to play
games and try to guess where a debug message might be located in the source.
It should just tell me. 

> The rest of the time, debug output
> from most libraries would be turned off as well, and only turned
> on when debugging a particular library.

That's not how it is now.

> This would be a lot easier than keeping adding and removing 
> debug output from the apps all the time, which we do currently.

the debug output is right now removed because it slows things down,
especially when kdebug is used. 

nana seems to be nicer because it only slows down when the code is compiled
with debug information and it actually makes sense to search for bugs. 

Anyway, there's no need to discuss. In either way nana and kdebug can be
used in parallel, so it's just a matter of taste which one to prefer. 

Dirk