Topic 1
This is quite a common use case. I have no problem with %equals but
%notEmpty{[%marker]} would be nicer for this use case - it would mean don’t
print anything if the variables in the pattern are empty strings.
Ralph
> On Sep 30, 2015, at 5:15 PM, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Topic 1
>
> Let's say I want my logs to look like this:
>
> Date [thread] [loggerName] [MarkerName] Message
>
> But most of the time I do not have a marker so I end up with a lot of lame
> looking log entries with [].
>
> Instead I'd rather see nothing.
>
> I could use a replace like this (not tested):
>
> %replace{[%marker]}{\[\]}{}
>
> But that seems 'expensive' and cryptic, the perfect combo ;-)
>
> Should we had a gadget so you can configure like:
>
> %equals{[%marker]}{[]}{}
>
> Which just does a String.equals instead of a RE match?
>
> Topic 2
>
> The toString on Markers are not nice when the marker has parents. Therefore,
> I'd like to add %simpleMarker (like there is a Class#getSimpleName).
> simpleMarker gets the name sans parents.
>
> Then I can say:
>
> %equals{[%simpleMarker]}{[]}{}
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> E-Mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> |
> [email protected] <mailto:[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 <http://garygregory.wordpress.com/>
> Home: http://garygregory.com/ <http://garygregory.com/>
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory <http://twitter.com/GaryGregory>
