On Mie, 5 de Enero de 2005, 14:56, Peter Hunsberger dijo: > 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?
Just for the records, We will still need to use isDebugEnable(). Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo.
