directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Karasulu <aok...@bellsouth.net>
Subject Re: FATAL in SLF4J, was: [VOTE] Logging Direction
Date Mon, 04 Jul 2005 22:54:32 GMT
Thanks Ceki for your response to these questions.  It helps while  
making our choices.  Anyway looks like we're going with SLF4J as a  
result of the vote that is due to close.

Alex


On Jul 4, 2005, at 4:30 PM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:

>
> Trustin Lee wrote:
>
> > SLF4J doesn't have "FATAL" level AFAIK.  Would this be OK?
>
> This question is answered in the SLF4J FAQ [1] quoted below:
>
>   Why doesn't the org.slf4j.Logger interface have methods for the  
> FATAL
>   level?
>
>   From the  stand point  of a logging  system, the distinction   
> between a
>   fatal error and an error  is usually not very useful. Most  
> programmers
>   exit the  application when  a fatal error  is encountered.   
> However, a
>   logging library cannot (and should not) decide on its own to  
> terminate
>   an application. The initiative to exit the application must be  
> left to
>   the developer.
>
>   Thus, the most the FATAL level can do is to highlight a given  
> error as
>   the cause for application to  crash. However, errors are by  
> definition
>   exceptional events  that merit attention. If a  given situation  
> causes
>   errors  to be  logged, the  causes should  be attended  to as   
> soon as
>   possible. However, if the "error" is actually a normal situation  
> which
>   cannot  be prevented  but merits  being aware  of, then  it   
> should be
>   marked as WARN, not ERROR.
>
>   Assuming  the ERROR level  designates exceptional  situations  
> meriting
>   close attention,  we are inclined to  believe that the  FATAL  
> level is
>   superfluous.
>
> Does this answer your question?
>
> [1] http://slf4j.org/faq.html#2.5
>
> -- 
>
> Ceki Gülcü
>
>   The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message