I understand. Thanks for the pointers though. I appreciate the help.
Ceki Gulcu wrote: > > > SLF4J offers very little in terms of functionality beyond the > abstraction of logging frameworks. I should have mentioned that it > does on so on purpose. The message interceptor functionality is not > aligned with that minimalistic philosophy. In short, there very little > chance for the interceptor code to be integrated into SLF4J. > > If you wish to extend org.slf4j.Logger I suggest that you look into > the slf4j-ext module, in particular the XLogger and LoggerWrapper > classes. > > http://slf4j.org/xref/org/slf4j/ext/LoggerWrapper.html > http://slf4j.org/xref/org/slf4j/ext/XLogger.html > > As mentioned in my previous message, TurboFilters in logback-classic > probably already do what you want. You should know that the > log4j-over-slf4j module will allow you to migrate a project using > log4j to slf4j without changing a single line of code. > > http://slf4j.org/legacy.html#log4j-over-slf4j > > > ogradyjd wrote: >> I did entertain the idea of extending the underlying logging system, but >> that >> ties my code to the underlying logging system. I was looking for a way >> to >> intercept messages to any underlying logging system, and was going to use >> commons logging until I saw the chatter on the net about slf4j. The >> point >> is that I'd like to get the messages from the abstraction layer so my >> code >> will run with whatever logging system is used, and to do that, I need a >> hook >> into the message processing of either commons logging or slf4j - >> preferably >> before the log message is passed to the underlying logging system. >> >> As it stands, I'd have to write a wrapper for the "logger" class for >> either >> slf4j or commons logging. I'd much rather use a hook into the message >> processing code, and since commons logging development is, er... >> stagnant, I >> figured I had a better chance with slf4j. I'd much rather use slf4j >> considering it also works with commons logging, which gives my current >> employer a migration path. My employer would not even consider moving >> from >> Log4j to logback right now. If I were able to use slf4j, however, and >> still >> send the messages to log4j, then the path is much easier to sell. >> >> What do you think? > > > -- > Ceki Gülcü > The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/ > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > dev@slf4j.org > http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Request-for-a-log-message-processing-hook.-tp23724666p23727454.html Sent from the Slf4J - dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@slf4j.org http://www.slf4j.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
