On 11/18/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/18/06, Joachim Draeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 18.11.2006, 08:53 +0000 schrieb robert burrell donkin:
>
> > > Imho it is really interesting to see that in jdk 1.5 the string
> > > concatenation is replaced by StringBuilder by default and this way is
> > > even better than using the StringBuffer.
> >
> > perhaps one plan would be to factor out logging calls into a
> > JamesLogEnabled class. the idea would be abstract all logging calls
> > into a superclass. this would perform a null check on the logger and
> > the isXXXEnabled. it would also provide pre-parameterized calls:
> >
> > info(Object one)
> > info(Object one, Object two)
> > ...
>
> Without even valuating your solution: I can't see the problem you're
> trying to solve.
readability and ease of coding
(which is why the next generation logging systems use this formulation)
another advantage is that this patterns takes care of null loggers
(which is currently causing me much pain)
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
