http://bugzilla.slf4j.org/show_bug.cgi?id=110
--- Comment #5 from Robert Elliot <rob...@teviotia.co.uk> 2009-04-21 21:01:33 --- (In reply to comment #4) > Unfortunately, you have to wait for a new log statement to determine the end > of > the throwable which introduces a new latency, which may be deemed > unacceptable. > In particular, if the last exception exception kills the application in which > case there will be no new log statements. That was why I rejected that approach - it seems to me that exceptions are the one thing you really don't want to swallow accidentally or attach incorrect timestamps to if nothing prints to the console for a significant period. There's another less significant issue with it too - the contract of Throwable.printStacktrace says that the format of the printed stack trace depends on the implementation, so theoretically another Java implementer could output the trace in a format that would break this. I'm less bothered about that, it's not like there are that many implementations out there and I'd hazard a guess they all copy Sun's format. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.slf4j.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@slf4j.org http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
