in reply to Re: Reference sub name
in thread Reference sub name

... without exposing program internals in the logs.

Why? Who is reading your logs and what do you think that they might discover?

(That they could just as easily discover by reading the sources which they presumably would also have access to.)

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
"Too many [] have been sedated by an oppressive environment of political correctness and risk aversion."

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Reference sub name
by martin (Friar) on Jul 27, 2008 at 13:56 UTC
    Exposing internals, in some cases, is not only a matter of secrecy. If your logs are not mainly intended for the purpose of debugging code, but for keeping track of any kind of events, internals might be irrelevant, needlessly verbose, and inconveniently varying with software versions. In any case simpler log file contents make log file evaluation simpler.

    The original post mentioned a logging interface already being in place, which supports the notion of a more general attitude.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom