On 22 Jul 2002, Bob Herrmann wrote: > That is an interesting idea, although in my particular case, I walk > the stack a variable amount. Namely if the stack has method "log()" or > method "internalLog()" I keep unrolling the stack - this may not be > a great idea - but it gives good stack traces without changing > other parts of tomcat.
We'll walk a variable ammount as well - until the first class after wrapperClass ( i.e. we look for the caller of a method in wrapperClass ). I don't think supporting wrappers which are wrapped by other wrappers is a goal :-) Wrapping commons-logging ( which is a wrapper ) as a transition mechanism should be enough. > If a webapp wants to use its own logger wrapper, and the factory > has a single attribute - would there be a conflict here? That may be a problem. I'm not worried about webapps ( they shouldn't play with logger-wrapping :-), but about jasper which may want to wrap as well. There is a solution tough - add all the 'wrapperClass' passed to the factory to list, and check for any of them when we un-wrap the stack. This will allow an unlimited number of wrappers - as long as one wrapper doesn't call another wrapper that wraps commons-logging, the wrapper. We should just use commons-logging - it is nice to have a smooth transition, but this should be just that, I don't think we should try to solve all the wrapping problems. Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
