Review Request 113181: Add KDebug porting notes to KDE5PORTING.html

[David Faure]

> On Oct. 16, 2013, 9:02 p.m., Mark Gaiser wrote:
> > KDE5PORTING.html, lines 290-295
> > <http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/113181/diff/2/?file=201374#file201374line290>
> >
> >     This is not valid anymore. It should now be qC<debug/warning/notice/...> and with a category. I think it;s best to just link to the wiki page and skip the other information in this area.
> 
> Martin Klapetek wrote:
>     Not all kDebug's are with a category and sometimes you just want a plain simple debug...?
> 
> Mark Gaiser wrote:
>     qCDebug() is the same as qDebug() when you don't provide a category. Actually, a new change in the categorized logger even made qCDebug(CATEGORY) behave the same as qDebug() because debug data is now by default just printed. Only prefixed with the category. I think it's best to advice people to use qCDebug now so that it's trival to add a category later on when needed and that people get used to using it. Adding the category later on ould even be automated by a script :p
> 
> Martin Klapetek wrote:
>     I'm still not sold to the idea that everything has to use qCDebug now, even (purposefully) uncategorized output.
>     
>     Opinions from others?
> 
> Sebastian Kügler wrote:
>     IMO replacing QDebug() with qCDebug() for empty categories would be a useless change. As soon as we start getting patches changing that "because it's recommended in KDE5PORTING.html", we'll see that it really only increases review workload and patch churn without benefit.
>     
>     Uncategorized debugging is a lot more common than categorized.

I agree with "no unnecessary search/replace", leave qDebug() as it is.

However, in the longer run, all (non-commented-out) debug statements from any framework should have a category, so that it's possible to turn them off.


- David


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/113181/#review41837
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Oct. 16, 2013, 7:45 a.m., Martin Klapetek wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/113181/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 16, 2013, 7:45 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDE Frameworks.
> 
> 
> Repository: kdelibs
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Adds part about KDebug
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   KDE5PORTING.html acb408c 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/113181/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Martin Klapetek
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20131020/363702b3/attachment-0001.html>