No more prints #1373

Open
opened 2018-10-12 09:40:46 +02:00 by PeterSurda · 2 comments
PeterSurda commented 2018-10-12 09:40:46 +02:00 (Migrated from github.com)

There are still occasions where print has remained and should be replaced by the logger.*. Some can remain, e.g. the notification about daemonizing or missing dependencies. This issue will be updated as I find more locations.

  • src/api.py
There are still occasions where `print` has remained and should be replaced by the `logger.*`. Some can remain, e.g. the notification about daemonizing or missing dependencies. This issue will be updated as I find more locations. - [x] `src/api.py`
coffeedogs commented 2018-10-19 17:30:32 +02:00 (Migrated from github.com)

@PeterSurda can we be clear about scope and expected results please? Some thoughts that come to mind:

  • Increase scope to use the opportunity of going through the code thoroughly with a mind on logging
  • Test various logging configurations (which?), remove config cruft, document what to expect out of logging, maybe testing further logging config examples (rsyslog, elasticsearch?)
  • Ensure log levels are appropriate and sent to stdout/stderr as appropriate
  • Consider consolidating the number of log levels in use
  • Consider any refactoring or standardisation of logging code (e.g. avoid code repetition, circular imports)
  • Consider whether a log entry is actually required; maybe the point of a log entry is to watch out for a condition that better testing could have guarded against
  • Ensure consistent log message style (tenses, first/third sing/pl person etc.)
  • Change print statements to use the logger
  • Implement tests around logging (critical examples?)

Quick check of the scale of this task:
12 logger.exception() calls
12 logger.fatal() calls
13 logger.critical() calls
20 logger.warning() calls
167 logger.info() calls
185 logger.debug() calls
467 (approx) print statements

@PeterSurda can we be clear about scope and expected results please? Some thoughts that come to mind: * Increase scope to use the opportunity of going through the code thoroughly with a mind on logging * Test various logging configurations (which?), remove config cruft, document what to expect out of logging, maybe testing further logging config examples (rsyslog, elasticsearch?) * Ensure log levels are appropriate and sent to stdout/stderr as appropriate * Consider consolidating the number of log levels in use * Consider any refactoring or standardisation of logging code (e.g. avoid code repetition, circular imports) * Consider whether a log entry is actually required; maybe the point of a log entry is to watch out for a condition that better testing could have guarded against * Ensure consistent log message style (tenses, first/third sing/pl person etc.) * Change print statements to use the logger * Implement tests around logging (critical examples?) Quick check of the scale of this task: 12 `logger.exception()` calls 12 `logger.fatal()` calls 13 `logger.critical()` calls 20 `logger.warning()` calls 167 `logger.info()` calls 185 `logger.debug()` calls 467 (approx) `print` statements
navjotcis commented 2020-09-22 15:54:08 +02:00 (Migrated from github.com)

I have removed the print statement of the api.py module.
https://github.com/Bitmessage/PyBitmessage/pull/1673

I have removed the print statement of the api.py module. https://github.com/Bitmessage/PyBitmessage/pull/1673
This repo is archived. You cannot comment on issues.
No Milestone
No project
No Assignees
1 Participants
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: Bitmessage/PyBitmessage-2024-12-11#1373
No description provided.