Hi All:
In the v2 manual I see this example for markers:
private static final Marker SQL_MARKER = MarkerManager.getMarker("SQL");
private static final Marker UPDATE_MARKER =
MarkerManager.getMarker("SQL_UPDATE", SQL_MARKER);
private static final Marker QUERY_MARKER =
MarkerManager.getMarker("SQL_QUERY", SQL_MARKER
I seems more consistent to be able to use hierarchical names just like for
loggers, for example:
In the v2 manual I see:
private static final Marker SQL_MARKER = MarkerManager.getMarker("SQL");
private static final Marker UPDATE_MARKER =
MarkerManager.getMarker("SQL.UPDATE");
private static final Marker QUERY_MARKER =
MarkerManager.getMarker("SQL.QUERY", SQL_MARKER
Why introduce a /different/ parent-child concept when are already have one
well defined and understood for loggers?
Thoughts?
--
E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected]
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
