Peter Donald wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2001 21:35, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> > > It is much easier to just go
> > >
> > > getLogger().debug( .... )
> > >
> > > Far more user/developer friendly.
> >
> > Totally.
> >
> > Ah, as a side note: why are you guys always suggesting doing
> > getLogger()? couldn't we make the logger variable of AbstractLoggable
> > protected so that extending classes already have access to it and avoid
> > making method calls to retrieve it? it's both easier and faster, but
> > maybe you guys thought of something I'm forgetting, thus my questions.
>
> It is final so it will be inlined. Basically it is to avoid choosing the
> variable name between m_logger and logger. Some people hate m_ ;)
Ok, good enough.
Please, if possible, make this evident in the documentation or people
will percieve it as a speed problem.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
