'[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:' > > Author: ceki > Date: Fri Aug 12 19:58:45 2005 > New Revision: 158
Hi ceki, can you give us the log.trace() now? As metioned previously, log.trace() is used by many other projects and I think, the success/adoption of slf4j really depends on it (magnitudes more than on markers or child loggers). E.g., one may think: just for having a trace() I need to wrap e.g. nlog4j again, so why should I switch ? Just to do all the work again ... Also Markers are by far NOT an appropriate replacement: as mentioned before, markers are a completely different playground (aka axis or orthogonal to log.xxx) - when I have a problem and enable debug, I get a StackTrace, which gives me clearly a hint, on which class I may configure a trace and that's it. A stacktrace gives NO CLUE at all, what markers I've to use, to get a trace (or do you imply, that if one uses markers, that he includes the markers in the getMessage() output or even extend/wraps all exceptions to have a getMarkers() method ?) ... So please add a trace() and make people happy ;-) Regards, jens. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
