----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 6:21 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Promote "Logging" Proposal to jakarta-commons
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:03, Morgan Delagrange wrote:
> > Hmm, I don't see the big deal. A String is an Object, and every Object
has
> > a toString() method. It's common practice to accept Objects can call
> > toString() on them.
>
> then whats the point of passing in an object? If its not a big deal then
it
> should be an easy change ;)
I just don't understand. Log4J supports it, and everything else degrades
gracefully.
> > I would not expect this method to be used very often, but it's important
> > for legacy products that don't want to change their API. Otherwise you
> > have to remove all those setDebug() methods from the code, which means
all
> > the dependant projects have to change _their_ code, and it's a big, big
> > mess. It would be much better to handle the transition between logging
> > methods transparently. That way, those legacy projects can enable
> > debugging through their old methods _or_ externally.
>
> So have the default implementation have a similar method and call that. I
am
> not sure why it needs to be part of the interface.
I don't see how it helps if it's not in the interface.
> > > Could you outline?
> >
> > I have no idea if all loggers will support this well or at all.
>
> Its one line if they don't - in many ways it is easier if they don't ;)
See
> Syslog example posted before.
>
> > > > Also it's possible that loggers won't support it at all. The
> > > > only current requirement of the Logging component is a String name
for
> > > > a logging category; this is not guaranteed to be a parseable
hierarchy.
> > >
> > > true but all logging toolkits I know of do do it to some degree or
> >
> > another.
> >
> > What about the toolkits you don't know about? ;)
>
> I have looked at all the ones I could find. And as I said - if they don't
> support it then it is even easier to integrate ;)
>
How do you propose avoiding NullPointerExceptions? If it's in the
interface, it has to be supported or degrade gracefully. A method that may
or may not return a Log object does not degrade.
- Morgan
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> Pete
>
> *-----------------------------------------------------*
> * "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, *
> * and proving that there is no need to do so - almost *
> * everyone gets busy on the proof." *
> * - John Kenneth Galbraith *
> *-----------------------------------------------------*
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
