Re: [Patch review please] Further work for Receivers backport to 1.2

[Paul Smith]

On 19/04/2007, at 2:57 PM, Curt Arnold wrote:

On Apr 18, 2007, at 10:31 PM, Paul Smith wrote:


Maybe you could fake out the getLogger() calls like

      private static final class LogLogger {
           public void debug(final String msg) {
                LogLog.debug(msg);
           }
          public void warn(final String msg) {
                LogLog.warn(msg);
          }
         public void error(final String msg, final Throwable ex) {
               LogLog.error(msg, ex);
        }
     }
     private static final LogLogger getLogger() {
        return new LogLogger();
     }


Done, nice suggestion.  Bit clunky, but works for now.


Did my second suggestion, replacing that who chunk with

private static final LogLog getLogger() {
     return new LogLog();
}

not work?  Actually, since they are static methods, you could  
probably get away with returning null, but I thought that might be  
pushing it too much.


I'm a dumbo.  I realise now that your suggestion wasn't for both.   
I'll try the second technique exclusively.

I'm still working through some maven-eclipse issues.  I'm not  
_immediately_ loving Maven, but lets say I dislike it quite a bit  
less than I used to.  I can see some good things that have been done  
since the bad old 1.x days.


My reading the diffs had both the declaration and assignment as new  
code, so don't see how the split minimizes code change.



I'll take a peek.





I've taken your LoggeRepositoryExImpl class and currently trying it  
out.  I think I've got that bit working, and now have a problem with  
some of the receivers not having the fqnLoggerClass set.  This is  
something that Scott pointed out with the DBAppender, and I think I  
need to go back and check the others to make sure they work.

Getting this pluginRegistry working again has shown to me the 'age'  
of the Chainsaw code base.  The LogUI class could do with some  
serious gutting/cleaning, because the startup logic is... brittle.   
I'm sure I'm responsible for a good chunk of that evilness.    A  
Chainsaw 3 could probably be built on top of quite a bit of code  
ripped out from the 2.0 codebase.

Paul

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