21 comments

[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 31.0 ms ] thread
While I see the point the author is trying to make, I'm not really sure I agree. Most users don't even read error messages, never mind logs. At best, logs are something they need for compliance, for most, the concept doesn't exist at all. I do agree that the logs should help you understand what went wrong and why, but in that regard the principle is the same for both sysadmins and developers and I don't really see the difference?
For a FOSS Android app I co-develop, we go out of our way to make verbose logging efficient to collect & easy to share (one-click copy). I've seen users get good mileage out of asking an LLM just what has gone wrong. We are adding more structure to log messages and add in as much state (like callstack) as possible with each log line, and diagnostics from procfs on resources held (like memory, threads, fds).
All software should provide something meaningful for anybody to diagnose, if they’re inclined to. It’s particularly bad in the (Apple) mobile ecosystem, including AppleTV.

I have AdGuard Home but one of my spouse’s streaming services wouldn’t work. “There was a problem.” Gee thanks. Eventually figured out that I had to unblock a few hosts so it would work. Only found which ones by googling and finding some other poor soul who fixed it and documented it.

> It’s particularly bad in the (Apple) mobile ecosystem

It's been years since I've significantly used Apple software, but when I had to use a Mac at work, or helped friends or family troubleshoot some problem on Mac OS, I had a similar experience. When things don't "just work", it was very difficult to figure out why it didn't work.

They don't want tinkering or tinkerers.

Apple is all about walled-off, locked-down, black box, just-works (when it does) etc. It's supposed to seem like magic. You're not supposed to tinker with magic, it makes it pedestrian. Apple as a brand is a lifestyle, a feeling. The slick, polished brand. Remember "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC"? PC is where you tinker, and there is screws and nuts and bolts and jargon and troubleshooting etc. In Apple land, you just take it to a slick genius bar and they do their magic. Or you just buy a new one.

As a European I'm always baffled how Apple got so much market share among the actual techies and power users in the US. You do it to yourself by buying this stuff. It's for people who don't want to spend one second thinking about actual technical issues.

Depends a lot on the context and type of software.

For server side software where there is a sysadmin in charge of keeping it running I generally agree.

But for end user software (desktop, mobile, embedded) no one wil read the logs and there the logs can, and probably should, be aimed at the developers. Of course you can and should still provide usable and informative end user oriented error messages but they're not the same thing as logs

A small subset of technical users do read logs. If a desktop app has a problem, I have a fighting chance of fixing it if I have logs. Error messages may not give the full picture; what was the app trying to do before the error occurred? Logs let me debug slowness and crashes.
Of possible interest:

* https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/2022/01/08/logging-code-smell/

* https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/2026/02/03/lloopy-loops/

Both of these posts discuss using event-based frameworks to eliminate duplicative (cross-cutting) logging statements throughout a code base.

My desktop Markdown editor[1], uses this approach to output log messages to a dialog box, a status bar, and standard error, effectively "for free".

[1]: https://repo.autonoma.ca/repo/keenwrite/tree/HEAD/src/main/j...

I feel like this is an outdated point of view now. Logs are clearly going to be read primarily by agents very soon, if they're not already now.

For example, we're experimenting with having Claude Desktop read log files for remote users. It's often able to troubleshoot and solve issues for our users faster than we can, especially after you give it access to your codebase through GH MCP or something like that. It's wild.

> But if your software is successful (especially if it gets distributed to other people), most of the people running it won't be the developers, they'll only be operating it.

The biggest problem is what when you wrote a code for a 'totally obvious message' you yourself was in the context. Years, year, heck even weeks later you would stare at it and wonder 'why tf I didn't wrote something more verbose?'.

Anecdote: I wrote some supporting scripts to 'integrate' two systems three times - totally oblivious the second and the third times what I already did it. Both times I was somewhere 60% when I though 'wait I totally recognize this code but I just wrote it! What in Deja-vu-nation?!'.

This is a not-so subtle advantage JavaScript has over 90% of everything else: Chrome DevTools Protocol (CDP), which exists/is-great in-large-part thanks to JavaScript being an alive language. Of the Stop Writing Dead Programs variety (https://jackrusher.com/strange-loop-2022/, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33270235). It's just astoundingly capable, so very richly exposes such a featureful runtime, across so many dimensions of tooling. REPL, logging, performance, heap, profile, storage, tracing and others, just for the core, before you get into the browser based things. https://chromedevtools.github.io/devtools-protocol/

This is such a core advantage to javascript: that it is an alive language. The runtime makes it very easy to change and modify systems ongoingly, and as an operator, that is so so so much better than having a statically compiled binary, in terms of what is possible.

One of my favorite techniques is using SIGUSR1 to start the node debugger. Performance impact is not that bad. Pick a random container in prod, and... just debug it. Use logpoints instead of breakpoints, since you don't want to halt the world. Takes some scripting to SSH port forward to docker port forward to the container, but an LLM can crack that script out in no time. https://nodejs.org/en/learn/getting-started/debugging#enable...

My cherry on top is to make sure the services my apps consume are attached to globalThis, so I can just hit my services directly from the running instance, in the repl. Without having to trap them being used here or there.

From recent experience, I'm thinking logs need to be written for AI. Over the last few months, I've had a couple of issues where I took a bunch of logs from a bunch of interacting programs, pointed the AI at the logs and the source code and it's been really effective and finding the problems, often seeing patterns that would have been really hard for me to spot in all the noise.
I recently went all-in on the systemd ecosystem as much as I could on some recent hardware installs, and my biggest pet peeve is the double timestamps and double logs I find in journalctl... it's like they never intended you to read the logs...
Well the useful ones are. The rest are screaming into the void, or rather, the operator’s ear.
For years now I’ve been pushing for moving of all non actionable error messages and all aggregate-actionable error messages into telemetry data instead.

Not the least of which because log processing SaaS companies seem to be overcharging for their services even versus hosted Grafana services, and really many of us could do away with the rent seeking entirely.

The computational complexity of finding meaning in log files versus telemetry data leans toward this always being the case. It will never change except in brief cases of VC money subsidizing your subscription.

If an error shouldn’t trigger operator actions, but 1000 should, that’s a telemetry alert not a data dog or Splunk problem.

Rather than indulging the inevitable argument that most users never read log messages, I hope we can remember a more important fact:

Some users do read log messages, just as some users file useful bug reports. Even when they are a tiny minority, I find their discoveries valuable. They give me a view into problems that my software faces out there in the wilds of real-world use. My log messages enable those discoveries, and have led to improvements not only in my own code, but also in other people's projects that affect mine.

This is part of why I include a logging system and (hopefully) understandable messages in my software. Even standalone tools and GUI applications.

(And since I am among the minority who read log messages, I appreciate good ones in software made by other people. Especially when they allow me to solve a problem immediately, on my own, rather than waiting days or weeks get the developer's attention.)

Not really true for modern cloud architectures. If you have an appropriately tuned Observability stack you're probably pretty familiar with the logs.