LocationInfo is allowed to fail in extracting caller information while Logger.getLogger(...) must always succeed. If LocationInfo fails you either get incorrect location information or just '?' for the %M, %C, %L, %F pattern converters. If Logger.getLogger() fails then the whole named hierarchy becomes unreliable. So the difference can be summarized as between that of total and hard-to-decipher failure and that of partial and well-localized failure.
At 07:52 PM 12/20/2004, Scott Deboy wrote:
To help wrap this up, would you mind providing a little history into the conversations that took place when LocationInfo was first added?
I assume the same issue was discussed - LocationInfo's lack of reliability versus its benefit to the end user. That conversation must have tipped in favor of benefit to the end user. It would seem that someone arguing for this change could (but I won't) use the same argument in support.
I'm just trying to get clarification so we don't run into similar misunderstandings in the future.
Scott
-- Ceki G�lc�
The complete log4j manual: http://qos.ch/log4j/
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
