There may have been code that compiled using those headers, but it wouldn't have linked.
Found a bug perusing SyslogAppender (notice the repeated use of LOCAL1): else if (StringHelper::equalsIgnoreCase(s, LOG4CXX_STR("LOCAL0"), LOG4CXX_STR("local0"))) { return LOG_LOCAL0; } else if (StringHelper::equalsIgnoreCase(s, LOG4CXX_STR("LOCAL1"), LOG4CXX_STR("local1"))) { return LOG_LOCAL1; } else if (StringHelper::equalsIgnoreCase(s, LOG4CXX_STR("LOCAL1"), LOG4CXX_STR("local2"))) { return LOG_LOCAL2; } else if (StringHelper::equalsIgnoreCase(s, LOG4CXX_STR("LOCAL1"), LOG4CXX_STR("local3"))) { return LOG_LOCAL3; } else if (StringHelper::equalsIgnoreCase(s, LOG4CXX_STR("LOCAL1"), LOG4CXX_STR("local4"))) { return LOG_LOCAL4; } else if (StringHelper::equalsIgnoreCase(s, LOG4CXX_STR("LOCAL1"), LOG4CXX_STR("local5"))) { return LOG_LOCAL5; } else if (StringHelper::equalsIgnoreCase(s, LOG4CXX_STR("LOCAL1"), LOG4CXX_STR("local6"))) { return LOG_LOCAL6; } else if (StringHelper::equalsIgnoreCase(s, LOG4CXX_STR("LOCAL1"), LOG4CXX_STR("local7"))) { return LOG_LOCAL7; } On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Curt Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On May 1, 2008, at 9:45 AM, Dale King wrote: > > > > It looks like there are a few filters that have header files, but no > > source files. In particular, AndFilter, ExpressionFilter, > > LocationInfoFilter, MapFilter and PropertyFilter appear to not be > > implemented. > > > > If there is no implementation I don't think the headers should be > > included as this will confuse someone that sees them in the > > documentation and tries to use them. > > > > -- Dale King > > > > > I've added LOGCXX-276 for this issue. > > The definitions were apparently added while porting over the log4j 1.3 > rolling file appender, but the implementations were not exercised by the > unit tests and the lack of implementation was not noticed. > > Removing the headers could cause a program that successfully compiled to > fail to compile. Would have been okay to pull them before the 0.10.0 > release, but now we need to keep compatibility until we are ready to jump to > 0.11.x. The best way to fix the problem is to add the implementation in or > if that is not possible to note in the headers that they are unimplemented. > -- Dale King