logging-log4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: LOG4J2-242 (Fluent Logging)
Date Mon, 29 Jul 2013 20:48:33 GMT
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Nick Williams <
nicholas@nicholaswilliams.net> wrote:

> I'm working on LOG4J2-242 to add the ability to log fluently. It's going
> to work something like this:
>
> interface Logger:
>     + MessageBuilder trace();
>     + MessageBuilder debug();
>     + MessageBuilder info();
>     + MessageBuilder warn();
>     + MessageBuilder error();
>     + MessageBuilder fatal();
>     + MessageBuilder log(Level);
>
> + interface MessageBuilder:
>     message(String);
>     message(Object);
>     message(String, Object...);
>     marker(Marker);
>     exception(Throwable);
>     argument(Object);
>     arguments(Object...);
>     log();
>
> Bruce (the requester) had suggested adding the methods that return
> MessageBuilder to a different interface (as opposed to Logger) to keep from
> cluttering the Logger API. The way I see it our options are:
>
> - Create a FluentLogger interface to house these methods. I don't like
> this option because A) it complicates things significantly, B) it makes
> users have to call a different method on LogManager (getFluentLogger) to
> get a FluentLogger, and C) it means users have to have a Logger and a
> FluentLogger if they want to use both APIs.
>
> - Create a FluentLogger interface that extends Logger. This option is much
> better. It avoids cluttering the Logger API if that's all someone wants to
> use, it doesn't require someone to have a Logger and FluentLogger if they
> want to use both APIs, and it doesn't complicate the implementation
> significantly (all implementations can just implement FluentLogger). It
> does still mean LogManager (and related classes/interfaces) need getLogger
> and getFluentLogger methods, which I don't necessarily like.
>
> - Just add these methods to Logger, which is what I intended to do from
> the get-go and is what I still think is the best option.
>

 - and there's option 4: Don't do it.

At first glance, adding these methods to Logger looks confusing and
cluttered. The less messy solution seems to me FLogger extends Logger.

Gary


>
> I'm going to proceed with #3 for now, but if someone has a strong opinion
> otherwise please voice it so that we can discuss before I complete this.
>
> Nick
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
>


-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

Mime
View raw message