截至2。x, Apache Log4j内置了这个检查，所以不再需要isDebugEnabled()。只需执行debug()，如果未启用消息，则消息将被抑制。

它提高了速度，因为在调试文本中连接字符串是很常见的，这是昂贵的，例如:

boolean debugEnabled = logger.isDebugEnabled();
if (debugEnabled) {
    logger.debug("some debug text" + someState);
}

If you use option 2 you are doing a Boolean check which is fast. In option one you are doing a method call (pushing stuff on the stack) and then doing a Boolean check which is still fast. The problem I see is consistency. If some of your debug and info statements are wrapped and some are not it is not a consistent code style. Plus someone later on could change the debug statement to include concatenate strings, which is still pretty fast. I found that when we wrapped out debug and info statement in a large application and profiled it we saved a couple of percentage points in performance. Not much, but enough to make it worth the work. I now have a couple of macros setup in IntelliJ to automatically generate wrapped debug and info statements for me.

截至2。x, Apache Log4j内置了这个检查，所以不再需要isDebugEnabled()。只需执行debug()，如果未启用消息，则消息将被抑制。

Since in option 1 the message string is a constant, there is absolutely no gain in wrapping the logging statement with a condition, on the contrary, if the log statement is debug enabled, you will be evaluating twice, once in the isDebugEnabled() method and once in debug() method. The cost of invoking isDebugEnabled() is in the order of 5 to 30 nanoseconds which should be negligible for most practical purposes. Thus, option 2 is not desirable because it pollutes your code and provides no other gain.

我建议大多数人使用选项2，因为它不是特别贵。

案例1: log.debug(一个字符串)

例2: Log.debug(“一个字符串”+“两个字符串”+对象。toString + object2.toString)

在调用这两个函数时，必须计算log.debug中的参数字符串(无论是CASE 1还是Case2)。这就是人们所说的“昂贵”。如果你在它之前有一个条件，'isDebugEnabled()'，这些不需要计算，这是性能保存的地方。