> > I've just taken a look at your code and I think it's quite neat. > I've implemented it the other way around (i.e. a log-methods that receive a > dumb Level enum) but I kind of like your idea of putting the log-methods into > the enum instead. > This leaves the Logger interface alone, which is nice. > It should be extended by the various other methods, including > isEnabled(Logger)/isEnabled(Logger, Marker), though - as you said. > > Thanks for letting me know, > Joern.
Thanks - actually I'd prefer your way, it seems more natural, but I could do this way without needing a change. I've just tidied it up using reflection to make it much easier to add the missing methods, though probably at a small performance cost. Rob
_______________________________________________ slf4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/slf4j-dev
