A wrapper class (if you use something I suggest that you use something that is has been well-tested like commons-logging instead of writing your own) allows you to switch logger implementations but probably prohibits the use of some functionality. I would suggest using a wrapper only if you foresee the need to change logger (i.e. if you are writing a framework and want to leave the logger choice to someone else).
On Nov 12, 2007 1:46 PM, Integrator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi , > > I am comparing the advantages and disadvantages using log4j at its own vs > some sub classes (or wrapper classes) with methods for logging messages > from > application. > > > Which one is better and why ? So far i could understand Utilization of > wrapper ensures that you are not tied to specific logging solutions. > > Is that it or there is something more ? Please express your views and > experience on it. > > Thanks, > Integrator > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Advantages-of-using-static-log-methods-vs-sub-classes-methods-tf4793407.html#a13712766 > Sent from the Log4j - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- James A. N. Stauffer http://www.geocities.com/stauffer_james/ Are you good? Take the test at http://www.livingwaters.com/good/
