Robert Leland wrote:
Eric Molitor wrote:
The new Messages API could easily be mapped onto an implementation
similar to that of Log4J. Why not embrace that idea and utilize
familiar methods to provide access.
such as...
msgs.info("some.key");
msgs.warn("some.warn.key");
msgs.error("some.error.key");
Why not just:
msgs(MsgLevel.info, "some.key");
msgs(MsgLevel.warn, "some.warn.key");
etc...
Because 1) the whole point is to follow the familiar Log interface, and
2), that isn't as intuitive and requires knowledge of other classes.
My question here is who actually needs custom message types? I just
can't think of a time I've needed a custom message type for a
field-scoped message. If you did need a custom type at some point, you
could just make it a "field" then use the normal field-scoped methods.
Don
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
