[slf4j-dev] slf4j i8ln

[Pete Muir]

On 19 Aug 2009, at 19:43, Ceki Gulcu wrote:

>
>
> Pete Muir wrote:
>> Sorry, I was being loose with my language. I meant using an  
>> enumerated type such as
>> enum LogMessages {
>>   WRONG_PASSWORD, RIGHT_PASSWORD
>> }
>> log.warn(WRONG_PASSWORD);
>
> What would the signature of log.warn() look like? Is the following  
> legal java?
>
> interface Logger {
>  void warn(enum e);
> }
>
> I don't think it is.

This is valid in Java 5 and above. For example:

public interface Logger {

    public enum LogMessages {
       WRONG_PASSWORD
    }

    public static class Test {

       public void test() {
          Logger logger = new Logger() {

             public void warn(Enum<?> message) {
                // No-op, this is a mock
             }

          };
          logger.warn(LogMessages.WRONG_PASSWORD);
       }
    }

    public void warn(Enum<?> message);
}

Of course, this isn't valid in Java 1.4.

>
>> Yes, I'm also not sure that this is necessary, and it's certainly  
>> another concern not really relating to i8n IMO.
>>>
>>> Instead of debating the requirements, how about code that embodies  
>>> your vision of the API (assuming everything was possible)?
>> Hehe, sure, I definitely like to understand the requirements  
>> properly first, but I know others prefer a hack first approach :-)
>
> Well, I did not actually mean to hack a complete solution but back  
> up words with  at least some example code. Otherwise, it gets too  
> abstract for me...
>
> Previously, when I wrote: "You may wish to fork SLF4J on git." I  
> meant to say githib not git.
>
> By the way, the archives for this discussion are available from
> http://www.slf4j.org/pipermail/dev/2009-August/date.html
>
> Thus, there is perhaps no need to cc Rodney, Takeshi and David. They  
> can read the discussion from the archives if they wish to. If they  
> wish to respond, they can do so after subscribing to the dev at slf4j  
> mailing list. They can't respond to the mailing list without  
> subscribing first. When replying, I won't add or remove addressed on  
> my own initiative.

Good point, they know the discussion is happening now at least. I  
removed them from the cc.