[plt-dev] logging: strings vs. sexps

At Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:51:47 -0600, Robby Findler wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Grant Rettke <grettke at acm.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> >> On Feb 19, Robby Findler wrote:
> >>> I think Eli's asking 'why not do (log-info (format "~s"
> >>> my-sexp))?'. Right?
> >>
> >> [Uh, yeah, but that looks so much boring...]
> >
> > Is (log-info-sexpr ...) less boring?
> >
> 
> It is such a short macro; do we really need to add 3 more exports to
> scheme/base for that?

Maybe it's not that `log-message' needs to change, but that the
`log-error', etc. forms make the wrong thing easy.

Currently,

  (log-error expr)

expands to

  (let ([l (current-logger)])
    (when (log-level? l 'error)
      (log-message l 'error expr (current-continuation-marks))))


What if we change it to

  (let ([l (current-logger)])
    (when (log-level? l 'error)
      (let ([v expr])
        (log-message l 'error (format "~s" v) v))))

?

This changes both the formatting and the value supplied to log
receivers by `log-error'. Programmers who want more control over the
message and data can still use `log-message'.