[slf4j-dev] Re: Beta 4 and the new method signatures

[Ceki Gülcü]

Niclas,

Going through the list, I saw that you already raised the question [1].

I will try to answer in my next message.

[1] http://www.slf4j.org/pipermail/dev/2005-May/000049.html



At 09:48 PM 7/11/2005, you wrote:
>At 06:37 PM 7/11/2005, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>
>>I like;
>>  *  addChild to Logger, which can be extremely powerful in many IoC 
>> scenarios,
>>     and somethat difficult to emulate.
>>  *  Loggers able to belong to more than one category hierarchy.
>
>
>Niclas, you say that the addChild(String) method is somewhat difficult
>to emulate. I don't see how that is so.
>
>If manufacturing loggers is the responsibility of the container, then
>by construction it make any logger its wants. Otherwise, if the IoC
>container uses LoggerFactor.getLogger(String), then the IoC container
>can surely say:
>
>   Logger parentLogger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(parentLoggerName);
>   Logger childLogger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(parentLoggerName+childSuffix);
>
>Where is the rub?
>
>In order to keep the SLF4J API as thin as possible, I would prefer to
>avoid adding syntactic-sugar methods. If for whatever reason,
>Logger.addChild() is really hard to emulate outside of the logging
>system, then that is a different matter.
>
>So, is Logger.addChild() really hard to emulate or is it "just" a
>nice-to-have feature you'd like to see? Forgive my bluntness but I'd
>like to get to the bottom of this.
>
>
>>Cheers
>>Niclas
>
>--
>Ceki Gülcü
>
>   The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>dev mailing list
>dev at slf4j.org
>http://slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

-- 
Ceki Gülcü

   The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/