I would recommend pulling it out and moving it to its own module on a separate branch until we are happy with it.
Do you have the stack tests so I can run them? Ralph > On Apr 8, 2014, at 5:39 PM, Bruce Brouwer <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would like to finish up LOG4J2-547, but I had some questions that are on > the JIRA that I would like to get answered. I'll summarize them here: > > 1) Should the Logger streams be put in its own module? > * If we do this, it will make testing easier as I could pull in > log4j-core (as a test dependency). > * Removing the factory method from the Logger interface fits the pattern > of most other streaming wrappers in the JDK which use constructors. So there > is no good reason for why this needs to be in log4j-api. But there is no good > reason for it to be in core, either as it only depends on log4j-api, not > log4j-core. > > 2) Should we reverse the order of identifying the caller to start at the > bottom of the call stack, rather than the top > * The performance difference is so small that it cannot be detected with > JMH > * This impacts the way I implement the logger streams (inheritance vs. > wrapper) > * It makes the code simpler trying to detect the caller > > Or do we forget the logger streams entirely. In this case, can we please > remove what is there currently in log4j-api? > > -- > > Bruce Brouwer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
