Thanks, Endre - that makes sense. Yes, I was trying to test so I wouldn't have to do any String concatenation and processing if the level was turned off. Guess I was getting pretty anal ;-). TRACE, DEBUG, and INFO ought to be enough.
Rgds, Bret -- > -----Original Message----- > From: Endre Stølsvik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 9:36 AM > To: Log4J Users List > Subject: Re: isFatalEnabled()? > > Bret Schuhmacher wrote: > > There are methods for isDebugEnabled and isInfoEnabled, but how do > you > > check for isFatalEnabled or any of the other levels? I've used > > isEnabledFor(Priority.<level>), but Priority.FATAL and the rest are > > deprecated, so what's the best way to test for the unrepresented > > is<Level>Enabled levels? > > There is isTraceEnbled too. > > Just don't bother to test for them externally - they are always checked > for inside log4j at any rate. It is assumed that there are rather few > warnings, errors and fatals throughout an application, and that they > mostly won't be turned off anyway, thus there isn't much need for the > isEnabled methods. Those methods are only there to enable argument- > construction bypass - that is, not having to actually make the log- > message if logging for the particular level is turned off. > > Endre. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
