Richard Sitze wrote:
Matt, I think you are jumping the gun here. It is way to premature to
vote on your proposal, if for no other reason then there is a preexisting
proposal on the table.
Hi Richard, I'm apologize; I'm not trying to push aside your (excellent)
proposal. It obviously has sig
Matt, I think you are jumping the gun here. It is way to premature to
vote on your proposal, if for no other reason then there is a preexisting
proposal on the table.
That said, I would like to point out that your proposal is, on the
surface, very much in line with the original proposal. Spec
The API I proposed yesterday circumvents this problem and allows us to
add whatever methods we need for internationalization while not breaking
backwards compatability. Instead of adding methods to the Log
interface, we introduce a new interface, called "LocalizedLog". The key
is that the Log
