On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 14:21:01 -0600 (CST), Antonio Gallardo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mie, 5 de Enero de 2005, 14:14, Peter Hunsberger dijo: > > On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 21:06:14 +0100, Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > <snip>other loggers</snip> > >> > >> > and it looks like -1 on UGLI from Torsten. > >> > >> Well, I doubt I have to give a -1 with > >> the given facts... :-P > > > > What's to stop everyone from continuing to just construct the Strings > > like they do today and not use the UGLI parameter substitution? Isn't > > the fact that it can do substitution on up to two parameters just the > > equivalent of some extra convenience methods? Or is there something > > else I missed? > > Because UGLI allows only 2 parameters substitutions (you cannot substitute > 3 parameters). And this is not a big deal.
I think that's my point? If you want to sub in three things do it as normal String building and ignore the parameters substitution. Or use 2 parameters and one Java variable directly in the String... Nothing has gone away with UGLI, you just get some extra methods you can ignore if you want? -- Peter Hunsberger
