On Mon, 02 Jun 2008, Szakáts Viktor wrote: > >Since we already have a TRACE functionality on the > >C level which has nothing to do with this, I'd like > >to rename this to HB_NO_TRACEPRG. Or rather, shouldn't > >we tie this functionality to PROFILER? Opinions?
HB_NO_TRACEPRG is OK for me though I'd rather suggest to disable function call tracing and add HB_TRACEPRG > Inspecting it a little more, I think we > should just use another HB_TRACE level > for these messages, and leave the full > control to the HB_TRACE setting, rather > having another control layer above. > Harbour uses DEBUG level for most messages, > rarely some INFOs, so I think we should > simply make those PRG trace calls to the > INFO level. > The .prg level switch can be guarded > with #if HB_TR_LEVEL >= HB_TR_INFO so > the check won't cause any runtime overhead > if someone has built Harbour with higher > HB_TRACE level. > Opinions? 90% users on this list do not know what HB_TR_LEVEL does and how to use it. The above modification will mean for them that we are removing this feature at all. best regards, Przemek _______________________________________________ Harbour mailing list Harbour@harbour-project.org http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
