I see, so there actually is a use case to remove the need for the
isTraceEnabled check with the Supplier param...
Sent from my iPhone
> On 2016/02/19, at 14:10, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> The use case I wanted to do this for is:
>
> LOGGER.entry(“Request: “, ()->gson.toJson(request));
> .
> LOGGE
The use case I wanted to do this for is:
LOGGER.entry(“Request: “, ()->gson.toJson(request));
.
LOGGER.exit(response, ()->gson.toJson(response));
However this can be handled just as easily by
LOGGER.entry(new JsonMessage(request));
.
LOGGER.exit(response, new JsonMessage(response));
so I can li
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1280?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Remko Popma reopened LOG4J2-1280:
-
Taking a long hard look at my own work from last night I see I made a mistake.
{code}
protected void
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1280?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15153692#comment-15153692
]
Remko Popma edited comment on LOG4J2-1280 at 2/19/16 4:26 AM:
-
On Feb 18, 2016 5:38 PM, "Remko Popma" wrote:
>
> I would start with just a default FlowMessageFactory. Configurable with a
system property, so users can swap in their own if they want.
>
> Only if the need arises to configure FlowMessageFactories on a per-logger
basis, we can consider adding the
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1255?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15153594#comment-15153594
]
Remko Popma commented on LOG4J2-1255:
-
Taking another good hard look at this, we curr
I would start with just a default FlowMessageFactory. Configurable with a
system property, so users can swap in their own if they want.
Only if the need arises to configure FlowMessageFactories on a per-logger
basis, we can consider adding the methods to LogManager to support that.
So no need for
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 4:22 PM, Ralph Goers
wrote:
> Is it really necessary to have getLogger support FlowMessageFactory?
> These messages are really meant as wrappers for other messages. so I am not
> even sure what it would mean for getLogger() to support that. How would it
> know what Message
Is it really necessary to have getLogger support FlowMessageFactory? These
messages are really meant as wrappers for other messages. so I am not even sure
what it would mean for getLogger() to support that. How would it know what
Message it is wrapping?
I am really getting sorry that I started
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15153396#comment-15153396
]
Matt Sicker commented on LOG4J2-1279:
-
Might as well. Would it be possible to use the
On Friday, 19 February 2016, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Remko Popma > wrote:
>
>> I think preserving binary compatibility on its own is a strong reason for
>> doing this, but it's more than that.
>>
>
> OK, since org.apache.logging.log4j.message.MessageFactory is in l
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Remko Popma wrote:
> I think preserving binary compatibility on its own is a strong reason for
> doing this, but it's more than that.
>
OK, since org.apache.logging.log4j.message.MessageFactory is in log4j-api
that's important. I can buy that. BUT, we are also ad
np. :-)
Sent from my iPhone
> On 2016/02/19, at 7:16, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> I was just having fun ;-)
>
>> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Remko Popma wrote:
>> Yes, slip up. Sorry.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On 2016/02/19, at 2:30, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey, that's not a
I was just having fun ;-)
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Remko Popma wrote:
> Yes, slip up. Sorry.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 2016/02/19, at 2:30, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Hey, that's not a Javadoc fix ;-)
>
> Gary
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From:
> Date: Thu, Feb 18, 2
I think preserving binary compatibility on its own is a strong reason for doing
this, but it's more than that.
Having a separate factory for flow messages makes both factories more cohesive
(single responsibility principle). No need for one factory to extend the other
in my view.
The logger
Yes, slip up. Sorry.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 2016/02/19, at 2:30, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Hey, that's not a Javadoc fix ;-)
>
> Gary
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From:
> Date: Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:18 AM
> Subject: [2/2] logging-log4j2 git commit: LOG4J2-1255 javadoc fix
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15152758#comment-15152758
]
Gary Gregory commented on LOG4J2-1279:
--
I think there are other fixes in LANG, maybe
Hey, that's not a Javadoc fix ;-)
Gary
-- Forwarded message --
From:
Date: Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 7:18 AM
Subject: [2/2] logging-log4j2 git commit: LOG4J2-1255 javadoc fix
To: [email protected]
LOG4J2-1255 javadoc fix
Project: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/log
Is a flow message factory a kind of message factory or a different kind of
factory?
Does a logger need instances of both or just the one?
Since entry message extends message, should the factory do so as well?
Gary, phone, typos.
On Feb 18, 2016 8:44 AM, "Remko Popma" wrote:
> Would anyone mind
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Tony Baines updated LOG4J2-1279:
Priority: Minor (was: Major)
> NullPointerException in FastDateParser$TimeZoneStrategy
> -
Would anyone mind terribly if I factored out the FlowMessage creation
methods from MessageFactory to a new interface FlowMessageFactory?
Concretely, this interface would contain the methods introduced in
LOG4J2-1255:
EntryMessage newEntryMessage(Message message);
ExitMessage newExitMessage(Object
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15152566#comment-15152566
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on LOG4J2-1279:
GitHub user tonybaines opened a pull req
I addressed the problem in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1280
LambdaUtil now correctly handles the case where Suppliers returns a
Message object.
I believe that MessageSupplier can now be deprecated.
It may also make sense to remove the new traceEntry/traceExit methods
introduced i
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1255?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Remko Popma resolved LOG4J2-1255.
-
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed the issue with AbstractMessage.toString() being necessary to work around
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1280?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15152456#comment-15152456
]
Remko Popma commented on LOG4J2-1280:
-
I believe the MessageSupplier interface can no
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1280?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Remko Popma resolved LOG4J2-1280.
-
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed in master in commit a56f420.
> Logger methods taking Supplier parameters
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1280?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Remko Popma closed LOG4J2-1280.
---
> Logger methods taking Supplier parameters should check if supplied value
> is Message
> --
Remko Popma created LOG4J2-1280:
---
Summary: Logger methods taking Supplier parameters should check
if supplied value is Message
Key: LOG4J2-1280
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1280
Pro
Tony Baines created LOG4J2-1279:
---
Summary: NullPointerException in FastDateParser$TimeZoneStrategy
Key: LOG4J2-1279
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1279
Project: Log4j 2
Issue
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1271?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15152109#comment-15152109
]
Remko Popma edited comment on LOG4J2-1271 at 2/18/16 10:37 AM:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1271?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15152109#comment-15152109
]
Remko Popma commented on LOG4J2-1271:
-
Something like this:
{code}
private void appen
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1270?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15152099#comment-15152099
]
Remko Popma edited comment on LOG4J2-1270 at 2/18/16 10:28 AM:
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1270?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15152099#comment-15152099
]
Remko Popma commented on LOG4J2-1270:
-
I found why the "NoGC" test was not completely
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1271?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15151915#comment-15151915
]
Remko Popma edited comment on LOG4J2-1271 at 2/18/16 8:32 AM:
-
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-1271?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15151915#comment-15151915
]
Remko Popma commented on LOG4J2-1271:
-
Well darn, you're right of course!
I would li
35 matches
Mail list logo
