[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCLIENT-416?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Ortwin Glück reopened HTTPCLIENT-416:
-------------------------------------


Recent discussion on httpcomponents-dev suggests that we want to revisit this 
issue.

SLF4J is now used by an increasing number of libraries.
It offers compatibility libraries to JCL in both directions: use SLF4J in code 
and delegate to JCL at runtime, use JCL in code and delegate to SLF4J at 
runtime. Thus compatibility to JCL is guaranteed. But integrators need to be 
aware of the change.

> Consider replacing commons-logging by SLF4J
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HTTPCLIENT-416
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HTTPCLIENT-416
>             Project: HttpComponents HttpClient
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: HttpClient
>    Affects Versions: 3.0 Beta 1
>         Environment: Operating System: Windows 2000
> Platform: PC
>            Reporter: Ortwin Glück
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 4.0 Alpha 1
>
>         Attachments: commons-logging-to-log4j.xml
>
>
> As soon as Log4J 1.3 is available a move to UGLI is possible.
> This would improve Log performance with Log4J and render cleaner logging code 
> at
> the same time.
> Ceki writes:
> Since the org.apache.log4j.Logger class is a direct implementation of
> org.apache.ugli.ULogger interface, there is no need to wrap a log4j
> Logger to conform to the UGLI interface. Log4j Loggers are already
> ULoggers. It follows that the objects returned by
> o.a.ugli.LoggerFactory.getLogger("x") are identical to those returned
> by o.a.log4j.Logger.getLogger("x").
> Thus, using UGLI in conjunction with log4j will not carry any overhead
> whatsoever.
> As noted in my previous message, UGLI also supports parameterized log
> messages obliterating the need to surround log messages with
> logger.isXXXEnabled checks.
> Instead of writing:
>   if(logger.isDebugEnabled()) {
>     logger.debug("User with "+id+" entered wrong query string ["+query"]." );
>   }
> you can just write:
>   logger.debug("User with {} entered wrong query string [{}].", id, query);
> Give or take a nano-second, when the log statement is disabled, both
> forms perform equally well but the second form is easier to read and
> to write.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to