On 09/17/2009 03:32 PM, Oleg Sukhodolsky wrote:
imho removing dependency on j.u.logging for me looks as strange as
removing
dependency on j.l.Object or java.util.* :)
For example, if the libraries are broken up into a
set of fine grain modules then why would I need to have a logging module
installed to run a simple client application?
Perhaps because most application use logging ;)
But in general it is useful for developers only.
Agree, but if the application uses logging (which is disabled of course)
it anyway initialize the logging and has the same problem as AWT or 2D have now.
Why end user need it unless it wants to debug/trace?
the end-user doesn't need logging, but application may contain it any way.
The fix simply introduces a lightweight version of the logging facility.
Still, we didn't see any figures demonstrating a possible performance
gain, or memory-usage optimization, or download size reduction. These
would be very interesting to look over.
--
best regards,
Anthony
