Brian,
It's on my list too for lambdafying I just disagree with current
implementation. I understand and agree that having to create a guard should
not be required. It's awful to have to do. The point is that patch is still
way too eager because you don't want to evaluate a message until the LogRecord
arrives at a formatter inside of a handler. I don't want force anyone to use
catalogs. I want to force everyone to use message parameterized logging (with
or without a catalog) because it is powerful, lazy, and doesn't taste like a
vegetable. If your concern is sugary sweets then, add overloaded methods that
make message parameterized logging easy for the caller. If patch was rewritten
like I proposed, it would be as terse as your example bellow. The difference
is it would actually be lazy and would be useful when you need to create a
custom filter to find some ghost in a production machine. Relevant or not, my
patch would also enable lambdas and message catalogs. That is something that
will never happen under the current patch.
Jason
> I think a significant fraction of the community would disagree with you.
> We ran a survey where we collected suggestions for lambdafying API
> methods, and this one came in top of the list.
> There is a significant fraction of the developer community that uses the
> logging API and doesn't care at all about localization, but does care
> about logging performance. One doesn't have to look very far to see
> that it is common practice to surround logging calls with
>
> if (logger.isLogging(level))
> logger.log(level, msgExpr)
>
> to work around the eager evaluation. And such a practice is brittle,
> because it's easy to forget to do it in one place, and lose the benefit.
> Now, your answer might be "force all users to use message catalogs."
> But that's pretty mean. A lot of users really, really don't want to use
> message catalogs. They want to do:
>
> logger.log(level, () -> String.format(...));
>
> You're basically saying we should force-feed those users some
> message-catalog vegetables, because it's good for them.
