Re: io_trace

On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 22:47:08 -0400
al davis <[email protected]> wrote:

> > - catch stale traces. by defining trace* to ignore the arguments, a lot
> >   of cruft will accumulate and make it harder to switch them back on.
> >   also, unused variable warnings show up for variables that are used for
> >   traces. my "solution" is to define inactive traces as
> > 
> >   #define trace(x) (1)?(void)(0):(void)(x),
> > 
> >   instead of nothing. this way, the compiler checks x, without actually
> >   doing anything. maybe there is a simpler way, this one does not look
> >   dangerous...  
> 
> I see what you are doing, and as you say "does not look dangerous".  My
> concern, that is easy to check, is if it has any impact on speed.

I checked .. as expected there is no difference in speed.  Let's do it

> > - use ostreams instead of printf. i have used this to debug non-numeric
> >   objects, or matrices/vectors. this seems fully backwars compatible and
> >   harmless to me. but useful.  
> 
> .. was thinking of incorporating it, because it's a good idea.
> 
> printf here is only because of lingering code from when ACS,
> predecessor to gnucap, was written in C.

There are still some printf's remaining.  Let's get them all.