[slf4j-dev] Why no error(Throwable) on the Logger interface?

[Chris Miller]

I agree completely too. If exception handling/logging is being done in the 
correct places I'm yet to see a situation where there isn't some useful contextual 
information that can and should be added to the message. If there isn't anything 
to add, you invariably shouldn't be handling the exception at that level. 
I've failed plenty of code reviews for this reason over the years, and I'd 
automatically fail any code that was just calling logger.error(ex). I'm quite 
fussy about this these days; there have been far too many occasions in the 
past where I've had a production app failing without logging enough information 
to diagnose the problem, even though it was clear that the information was 
in fact available at runtime. Having to fix the logging then wait until production 
falls over again before the problem can be isolated is a horrible situation 
to find yourself in.

Note that I also feel that assuming your logging configuration will write 
out thread names etc is a bad idea; that is external configuration that can 
change outside of the control of your code and it's better to be explicit 
about it, in the places where it obviously matters.

Just my 2c.

Chris


> I agree 100%. Having only the methods as they are now kind of enforces
> a better overall logging style.
> 
> While one still has the option to simply call logger.error("",ex) it
> should seriously make you feel a bit guilty, especially in
> non-trivial, larger projects... I'd also point at it in a code-review,
> asking "wtf?" ;)
> 
> Regards,
> Joern.