[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-42?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Ralph Goers resolved LOG4J2-42.
-------------------------------

       Resolution: Fixed
    Fix Version/s: 2.0-rc2

Created ServletContextAppender in revision 1601789. Please verify and close

> Improving log4j so it can easily be used with servlet logging
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LOG4J2-42
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-42
>             Project: Log4j 2
>          Issue Type: Wish
>          Components: API
>            Reporter: Curt Arnold
>             Fix For: 2.0-rc2
>
>
> On May 30, 2010, at 11:49 AM, Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen wrote:
> There is one more thing that I would really like to see in log4j 2.0, namely 
> the ability for a servlet to log to a servlet container using log4j (and in 
> slf4j too but that is a different story).   Currently that cannot be done, 
> because there is no way for the code asking for the logger to pass a "this" 
> reference to the logging framework.
> I would suggest that in log4j 2.0 the LoggerManager.getLogger() signature is 
> changed to accept the class (as now), and a varargs of Objects.  The objects 
> are passed to the appender when needing to do the actual logging, allowing a 
> ServletLoggerAppender to look for any object extending GenericServlet and 
> invoke its log method.
> For client code it would mean that the logger object was retreived similar to:
>   Logger log = Logger.getLogger(this.getClass(), this);
> We might even consider making the rule in log4j 2.0 that "the name of the 
> logger is the full name of the class of the first object"[2].  In that case 
> we could make do with:
>  Logger log = Logger.getLogger(this);
> This would most likely also result in much other code being cleaner by 
> allowing to drop the "getClass()" clause.
> What do you think?
> [1] 
> http://java.sun.com/j2ee/1.4/docs/api/javax/servlet/GenericServlet.html#log%28java.lang.String%29
>  
> [2] For backwards compatability instances of Class should be treated slightly 
> different :)
> -- 
>  Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen  "...plus... Tubular Bells!"
> The follows at http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.jakarta.log4j.devel/15576



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org

Reply via email to