On 1/18/07, Marcel Gołuński <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there any other way (easier, faster) to determine that loggers and
appenders were created and attached succesfully?
Its a pity that log4j does not support exceptions, but i
understand the
"performance issue", and think that it is connected with the lack of
exceptions.
On Jan 18, 2007, at 9:39 AM, James Stauffer wrote:
I believe the reason that log4j configuration doesn't thow exceptions
is that normally logging isn't the core reason for the program and a
problem with logging shouldn't stop the program.
If you look through the API I believe you will find methods to obtain
attached appenders so you could verify that way (but then your code
would have to know about your config).
My understanding is the lack of exceptions from the configurators was
not motivated by performance concerns, but that a bad configuration
file would not cause an otherwise working application to fail.
Unfortunately, that design decision makes it difficult to
programatically respond to configuration failures, like providing a
backup configuration if the configuration file was missing.
I did start an experimental project (search for strictxml) in the
sandbox for new XML configurator that used a stricter syntax and
provided more feedback on the processing of the configuration.
However, that has been dormant for a while and probably will not see
much addition effort until log4j 2.0 development starts whenever that
is.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
