|
yes, it is pretty brutal. I thought if it was 'in the best interests'
of the user we could consider it, but as I said, I don't really
understand the use cases that may benefit from sub-classing Logger. "Nothing to see here, move along now". :D Paul Yoav Shapira wrote: Hola, I don't think we should subclass it as final. That's a radical measure far beyond a recommendation, and we can't assume we know all the use-cases/scenarios under which people might want to subclass Logger.The above applies to most open-source code, especially utility-level stuff like log4j, not just the Logger class per-se ;) Yoav-----Original Message----- From: Paul Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 6:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: sub-classing logger - mark as final? If we do not recommend sub-classing Logger, should we just mark it as final? (or am I over simplfying things here?). cheers, Paul --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] |
- sub-classing logger - mark as final? Paul Smith
- RE: sub-classing logger - mark as final? Yoav Shapira
- Re: sub-classing logger - mark as final? Paul Smith
- Re: sub-classing logger - mark as final? Curt Arnold
