On 15 October 2015 at 17:31, Daniel Fuchs <daniel.fu...@oracle.com> wrote: >> I have a major concern that the class names 'Logger' and 'Level' >> duplicate those of java.util.logging. While they are inner classes as >> opposed to top level classes, both IntelliJ and Eclipse will find the >> inner class and top level class when typing "Logger". This will no >> doubt cause many users to import the wrong one. I propose that these >> classes are renamed to avoid this problem. The simplest would be to >> change them from inner classes to top level classes "System.Logger" -> >> "SystemLogger". Alternatively, they could stay as inner classes and be >> prefixed "System.Logger" -> "System.SysLogger" or "System.Logger" -> >> "System.BasicLogger". > > > After having worked with it for some time I find that using > inner interfaces/classes for Logger and Level is not that > bad. Certainly better than if it was a top-level class of > the same name. It is fortunately rare that you need to use > both (the System. and the j.u.l one) in the same class. > > It's hard to find a compelling new name though :-)
Since I assume the purpose of these new Logger/Level interfaces is simplistic and primarily for the JDK's own use, a name that emphasises that would seem reasonable, hence BasicLogger/BasicLoggerLevel or similar. Stephen
