From kde-core-devel Tue Dec 21 17:03:39 1999 From: Stephan Kulow Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 17:03:39 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: RFC: Strategy for integrating the Nana debugging library X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=94579621222417 David Faure wrote: > > Stephan wrote : > > Well, I don't see why nana can't be used side by side to kdebug. > Sure. As I said : fine with me if applications developers use nana, > as long as kDebug is the one used for debug output, for the reasons > I explained already many times. > > But only if it doesn't prevent from compiling KDE with other compilers > than gcc (it is possible to do that, right ? Your "patch for CC5" for Qt, > is it about a compiler ?). Yes. SparcWorks C++-Compiler 5.0. kdelibs works fine with it, haven't tried other stuff, but as it's ANSI compatible it's only small glitches. > > > Those that want nana can - it's after all a very tiny library > Yes, if it doesn't limit KDE to gcc (provided that it wasn't already limited > to it). > > > (and I compile with -g everything since I compile KDE at all > > [actually --enable-debug was the very first configure switch we had]). > :-) Well, not everybody does that. Especially not users, even the ones > that use bleeding edge KDE and report bugs ! > > > But your kdebug changes should definitly go > > in, you're right that we shouldn't make our developers after libraries, > > but our libraries after our developers. And history showed that > > whatever we gave them, they printf()ed ;-) > Exactly :-) > And raw printfs are evil because they can't be turned off. > > > But I would use asserts that can give me more output than "it > > was wrong" anytime I can. > Well if that's the only reason for nana, what about > void kAssert( bool condition, const char *fmt, ... ) ? Well, that would help me, not sure about others :) Greetings, Stephan -- When your memory goes, forget it!