On Thursday 20 September 2007 4:58:54 pm Tim Bird wrote:
Hmmm. The hard part isn't making printk(0,blah) mean the same as not having a
log level message now, because the current logic already handles it. The
problem is that filtering continuations of previous messages involves knowing
what log level the previous message was so you know whether or not to filter
it.
Yeah, that would take some doing to untangle. An incremental switchever (easy
printks first, I.E. the ones that currently specify a loglevel) seems more
strongly indicated...
That said, I started this by noting I haven't personally had time to bang on
this since I thought of it. You did ask for ideas. :)
Rob
--
"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson.
-