logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard Sitze" <rsi...@us.ibm.com>
Subject Re: Common Logging Interface
Date Wed, 07 Nov 2001 21:45:17 GMT
Peter wrote:
>On Thu, 8 Nov 2001 05:32, Richard Sitze wrote:
>> I want a common interface that is *implemented* (as in Java 'class
>> implements commonLogger') by both the LogKit Logger and the Log4J
>> Category/Logger classes.
>not a chance in hell as there is no advantage. LogKit and Log4j will not
>around in a few years when JDK logging is established. Theres no real
>in changing APIs now if only going to get dropped in future.

OK, great.  So why do I want to use your framework as a basis and adapter
your logger API?  Rather, that leads me to think that I should be
considering your framework with a different logging API.  More work to
bring AXIS around, but hey, not a bad idea.  Also, I don't have to worry
about getting you guys to migrate.  :-)

Seriously, you have a good point.

>> Yes, as wrappers.  One of the major hangups we keep stumbling into is
>> we end up with wrappers of wrappers of wrappers...
>errr ... we have one wrapper.. whats the problem with that?

I'm a performance biggot, OK?  Berin's point that this gets optimized out
is a good one.  Something to think about..

>> I agree.  Once we have a simple interface there are many obvious
>> extensions...  but I want to address the core problem first.  In light
>> your example I would not be adverse to a 'getName()' method in the
>> interface...
>getName violates IOC. No need to have that in there.

You and Berin get your story straight on this, I'm happy to go along for
the ride.


>"abandon all hope , ye who enter here" - dante, inferno
ouch, it's hot in here :-)


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:log4j-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:log4j-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message