[slf4j-dev] Re: TRACE level

[Niclas Hedhman]

On Tuesday 05 July 2005 21:06, Ceki Gülcü wrote:

> >Somehow it feels very similar to what we did in
> >LogKit as well as Avalon Logging API, but still not.
>
> What is similar in LogKit or Avalon Logging API? 

>Or maybe you just meant that
> marker functionality can be achieved by using child loggers?

Yes. As I mentioned, not same, just felt similar.

> However, markers allow us to mark *any* logger. So, if a concern cuts
> across many loggers, you can mark their statements with one
> marker. Compare that with the child logger approach where you would
> need as many "header" children as loggers.

Hmmm... Perhaps you are right. Which actually makes matters "worse" ;o)

If 
   logger.debug( m )
is the equivalent of 
   logger.log( Level.DEBUG, m );
and you are now introducing
   logger.log( Level.DEBUG, Marker.MINE, m );

Doesn't the question quickly becomes; "How many axis are enough?"
It used to be 1, you are now suggesting 2.

And personally, I feel this quickly will end up in AOP space, where you do N 
of your own choice :o)


I still have no opinion. Even the "gut" is undecided, which is very rare.


Cheers
Niclas