We have a huge (old legacy java) code-base, where many files (around 5k) have System.out.println's. We are planning to remove them for cleanup/performance reasons. How can we write a script that will replace them without introducing any issues in the code? The script cannot blindly delete them as following case can be an issue:
if ()
some.code...
else
System.out.println(...);
DB.close();
I'm thinking of replacing them with ';'. That will take care of above case. Do you see any other issues? Any other suggestions?
If your application is started at the command-line, you can disable the stdout stream for the entire program at the OS level. This would effectively disable all of your System. out.
You can do it by find in Project option then give System. out. println( to your search criteria then remove them all.
You can override the toString() method on your class instead, and then this will be used in all places that want to build a string representation of your instance, not simply System. out. println .
You could use a conditional compilation to have a debug build with the print statements and a release build without them.
Basically, the idea is to create a final static class with a final static boolean that you use as a switch at compile time.
public final class Debug {
//set to false to allow compiler to identify and eliminate
//unreachable code
public static final boolean ON = true;
}
Then you can just replace all of your System.out.println
statements with
if(Debug.ON)
{
System.out.println...
}
Since the compiler will ignore any unreachable branches of code, you can just set ON = false
when you do a release build and the print statements will be excluded from your bytecode.
Note: This doesn't deal with the case that Oscar pointed out, where a print statement may change the state of some object. You could use conditional compilation to print to a null object when in release mode, as he suggested, instead of removing the prints altogether.
Have you consider the silly case:
System.out.println(" Print " + object.changeState() );
I don't think it happen but chances are the println executes a method that is actually performing some action on which the system depends on and may introduce subtle bugs ( believe me or not, but I have witnessed this )
Probably replacing with a logger and disabling the loggers may do.
Or creating a null object using the NullObject pattern:
public final class DevNull {
public final static PrintStream out = new PrintStream(new OutputStream() {
public void close() {}
public void flush() {}
public void write(byte[] b) {}
public void write(byte[] b, int off, int len) {}
public void write(int b) {}
} );
}
And replacing
System.out.println();
With
DevNull.out.println();
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With