Hi Roland,
The idea is good. I don't like the idea of a logger object in
the parameters though. Have you considered to put the _name_ of
the logger into the parameters and let Wire perform the lookup?
Makes sense, yes that is a good idea.
That's what I was planning for http-dispatch while I was still
working on it. Actually, I meant to allow a name in the params
and an object in the context, but the latter is a 4.0 concept.
One of these days I will spend some time and look into the new architecture. Sounds like it is going
to be exciting.
It is also possible to solve this without touching the API at all,
by using a logger implementation that keeps a ThreadLocal itself.
But changing Wire is surely simpler.
True, both is. Come to think of it, you are right. I sort of never thought of providing my own
LogFactory and hand out special derived Logger that allow for that. Makes sense too.
Since we know the name of the Logger the code requests, we could get the instance beforehand and set
the threadlocal "sidekick" Logger for example. I like this.
We've frozen the API. Contrib seems like a better place.
With such a change, how would that go into contrib? Just asking, since this is more a patch, then
anything else, right? So in contrib, how would that be presented?
should I keep "extending" the code with every updated version?
I expect exactly one more updated version: 3.1 final.
True, but with the above idea of using the custom Logger, it seems not to matter anymore, even later
when going to 4.0. I really have to reevaluate the whole idea.
Thanks,
Lars
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
