Well, no, not sure about that one.
I actually like that createMemento() under the hood calls
deserialize(serialize()) and uses LogEventProxy.

I would need to do more analysis to see if using new
Log4jLogEvent.Builder(this) would give the exact same result but I suspect
there are differences.


On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:09 AM, Mikael Ståldal <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I just pushed another commit to that branch which implements
> MutableLogEvent.createMemento() without deserialize(serialize(event)).
> Does it looks good too?
>
> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 5:59 PM, Remko Popma <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I reviewed the LOG4J2-1347 branch and I like the work Mikael did here. 
>> Replacing
>> the deserialize(serialize(logevent)) sequences with
>> Log4jLogEvent.createMemento() looks cleaner.
>>
>> I could not see any issue and I don't mind if these changes are merged
>> into master.
>>
>> (Implementing the feature requested in LOG4J2-1347 is a separate thing
>> and will require more work.)
>>
>> Remko
>>
>
>
>
> --
> [image: MagineTV]
>
> *Mikael Ståldal*
> Senior software developer
>
> *Magine TV*
> [email protected]
> Grev Turegatan 3  | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden  |   www.magine.com
>
> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this
> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message
> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you may not
> copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case,
> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply
> email.
>

Reply via email to