Sent from my iPhone
> On 2014/02/09, at 1:20, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If I remember correctly this was added on request of a user.
>> They did not want to set the StringFormatterMessageFactory when obtaining a
>> Logger because that would force them to use the printf format everywhere.
>> If I remember correctly the use case was that they wanted to use the
>> "message {} with {} params" in most cases but sometimes it was desirable to
>> use the printf format with its more fine-grained control over the output
>> format.
>> Ralph agreed that this would be a useful feature and made the change.
>
> I would not want that in my app... but that's just me.
>
> If the app can say "message {} with {} params" it can say "message %s with %s
> params" just the same IMO.
In my app I use the {} format most of the time because it's much faster. I
think I have a handful of places where I use the printf methods with detailed
formatting because it's more convenient than creating a new logger with
StringFormatterMessageFactory just for that message. I would not like to have
some of my app classes logging with the %s %f format and others log with the {}
format. That's asking for bugs... :-)
I also don't want to pay the performance penalty of using the %s format
everywhere for the handful of cases where I need the detailed formatting.
So the printf methods serve a useful purpose, I think. Please don't remove
them.
-Remko
> Gary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I think it has something to do with making it easier to port call sites
>>> from:
>>>
>>> System.out.println(...)
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> Console.printf(...)
>>>
>>> I do not think reusing these API names in Logger is a good idea though.
>>>
>>> I'd like to remove them.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Nick Williams
>>>> <nicho...@nicholaswilliams.net> wrote:
>>>> Yes, I'm confused by this addition to. Why did we do this?
>>>>
>>>> Nick
>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 30, 2014, at 12:24 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm slightly confused by this addition because it seems redundant with
>>>>> using StringFormattedMessage and StringFormattedMessageFactory
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>>>>> Spring Batch in Action
>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>>> Spring Batch in Action
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
> Spring Batch in Action
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
