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

[robert burrell donkin]

On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 21:32 +0200, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> At 07:54 AM 7/7/2005, Christian Stein wrote:
> >Hello Ceki, Niklas and all others!
> >
> >I'm totally with Niklas - especially in two issues. First the strong typing of
> >the 'message' and 'format' argument as String. And second, his proposal of the
> >generic 'log(LEVEL, message...)' methods. Nice to see the first issue
> >implemented in the current version of SLF4J, already. Is the 'log(...)' 
> >feature
> >  a no-go, Ceki?
> 
> The log(Level, ...) method requires that Level class be defined in
> SLF4J. But introducing Level as a class would be an important change
> to the scope of the SLF4J project.
> 
> SLF4J could define Level as an *interface* which raises the question
> of construction of Level instances. Admittedly, Marker suffers from
> the exact same problem.
> 
> Does this answer your question?

would level give anything new that marker does not?

- robert