On Sep 4, 9:01 pm, "Fred Sauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sunil,
>
> Fred Sauer
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Sunil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Excellent tool.
>
> Thanks
>
> - Which loggers are enabled by default, and which are not? I noticed
>
> > that the WindowLogger is not enabled by default. It would be great to
> > add this to the documentation.
>
> I added a note about the WindowLogger to the getting started wiki:
> http://code.google.com/p/gwt-log/wiki/GettingStarted
>
> Also added a note showing which loggers are activate by default.
That's great. Thanks for the quick response.
>
> - The Log.isLoggingEnabled method, returns true only if the log_level
>
> > is DEBUG. I would have expected it to return true even if ERROR is
> > enabled for instance. Is there any method which can check if logging
> > is enabled in general at runtime or not?
>
> It shouldn't work that way. When the log level is anything but OFF, the
> implementation is:
> public final boolean isLoggingEnabled() {
> return getLowestLogLevel() != Log.LOG_LEVEL_OFF && getCurrentLogLevel()
> != Log.LOG_LEVEL_OFF;
> }
>
I guess I am seeing this because I misunderstood the logging levels.
I was assuming that if I compiled at DEBUG level, it would
automatically include levels below it.
I compiled for DEBUG, and set the runtime log_level to INFO. Then if I
call isLoggingEnabled(), it returns false.
Does this mean that there is no inherent hierarchy in the levels like
log4j has, and that I have to specify compilation for all levels that
I need?
>
>
> > Thanks
> > Sunil.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"gwt-log" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/gwt-log?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
