uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marshall Schor <...@schor.com>
Subject Re: uima v3 logging
Date Mon, 06 Feb 2017 18:45:12 GMT
oops, hit send too soon.

I see the uimaFIT getLogger method is on a class which extends the main UIMA
class which would have getLogger().

uimaFIT's method would clash, because it returns a different Java type. 

I'll pick another name to avoid the clash.

-M

On 2/6/2017 1:29 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>
> +1 to not clashing, etc.
>
> I'm not sure they would clash - because the uimaFIT getLogger method is on
>
>
> On 2/3/2017 8:57 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote:
>> On 02.02.2017, at 17:16, Marshall Schor <msa@schor.com> wrote:
>>> 3) For Annotators, the base class they extend is augmented with getLogger() and
>>> getSlf4jLogger(); these return either the UIMA logger or an SLF4j logger with
>>> the name of the Annotator implementation class. getLogger() is just shorthand
>>> for the existing getContext().getLogger() api.
>> It would be nice to make sure that a getLogger() method added to the UIMA core
>> base classes would not clash with the one that the uimaFIT base-classes already
>> provide - or if not, then it means that indeed uimaFIT needs to move to UIMA v3
>> meaning the discussion we had about setting up builds simultaneously against v2
>> and v3 would become obsolete at least for uimaFIT.
>>
>> -- Richard
>


Mime
View raw message