[plt-dev] logging: strings vs. sexps

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:

> > It is such a short macro; do we really need to add 3 more exports to
> > scheme/base for that?
>
> +1 for not adding it, for exactly that reason.  (It probbaly doesn't
> even have to always be a macro, since the sexpr will usually not be
> expensive to construct.)
>

what if you want to do intermediate processing on the log before flushing it
out to the stream?

I think that's where logging sexp (or other objects) would be useful.  For
example, have the log receiver receiving a sexp and immediately handle the
information contained in sexp without having to incur the cost of parsing.

yc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/attachments/20090219/b48433d3/attachment.html>