Joe Batt wrote:
> Given the above is true, you could use something as simple as printlns
> to s global print writer. In debug mode it would go to the bit bucket.
> OK, I've used log4j, so I understand you may want something a little
> more substantial than that, but why does the user care to integrate FOP
> debugging into a larger logging structure?
I agree with all of your other points - I think you state the purpose
of logging very clearly. However, for this point, my answer
is: yes, the user does care, because:
1. If a solution is deployed at a user's site and the user observes problems,
he or she wants to be able to reproduce the problems with logging turned
on, because then the log file can be sent to the creator of the solution,
whether that's a company or an open source initiative.
2. If a solution consists of multiple building blocks like FOP, and the
user wants to turn on logging for the reason outlined under 1., then
it's preferable that all building blocks share the same logging mechanism.
Nevertheless, I have another point about user-side logging that matches your
However much I like logging (I actually prefer logging and staring into
source code over using debuggers), I have one general problem with logging
in the "production code". Quite a number of developers seem to misunderstand
logging as a replacement for careful and thorough error handling and recovery.
In my opinion, logging (in production code) is always only a diagnostic
enhancement of error handling - not a replacement.
BTW: Yes, I do prefer log output over no error handling at all. 8-)
Arnd Bei▀ner IT-Engineering
Bahnhofstr. 3, 71063 Sindelfingen, Germany
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: Using Avalon/Logkit Joe Batt
- RE: Using Avalon/Logkit arnd . beissner
- RE: Using Avalon/Logkit Savino, Matt C
- Re: Using Avalon/Logkit Joerg Pietschmann