On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 23:40:52 +0100, Ugo Cei <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Il giorno 05/gen/05, alle 21:56, Antonio Gallardo ha scritto: > > > 1-UGLI: If Torsten comment related to the 2 parameter limit in UGLI is > > true, then UGLI is not a serious proposal. Should be discarded. It is > > only > > a bad produced syntax sugar. I must admit, the idea with more > > parameters > > is really cool. Maybe in the future we can adopt it. I know we don't > > have > > some too heavy logging requirements. I mean I need 10's of parameters > > or > > recursive logging. > > If you have more than two parameters, you can always use string > concatenation with an isDebugEnabled() guard. UGLI does not take away > anything in this regard.
Yah, I just pointed that out a couple of messages ago and Torsten responded by asking why you shoudl bother switching in that case... -- Peter Hunsberger
