Am 09.03.2010 12:20, schrieb Joern Huxhorn: > Much like an ordinary stack-trace, the NDC is actually a stack. The > stacking of messages is the key here.
I know. But looking at your examples, I don't see something that the current Java stack trace wouldn't give me already. The logging of method arguments might be key here but a stack only really makes sense if you use recursion. Another issue is that the API usage is quite complicated for clients. They need to wrap each usage into try/finally blocks. However, I can see some value in having both - a simple to use MDC as well as an NDC. I wonder if it's possible to merge both into a central API "DiagnoseContext" or just DC. > The main difference between the MDC and (my implementation of) the NDC > is that NDC is also supporting the same Message as the one I proposed > for logging in general. This means, that the actual formatting of the > message isn't performed if it's not really needed (for example, if the > Appenders in Logback are not printing the NDC but choose to ignore it). That's just an implementation detail. MDC can be changed as well. Remember, we are talking about a version 2.0 which means breaking API changes anyway. > With MDC, on the other hand, one would have to format the message > anyway. Deferring formatting is good (performance wise). I think such a message class (under the covers) should be a key concept in SLF4J 2.0. -Gunnar -- Gunnar Wagenknecht [email protected] http://wagenknecht.org/ _______________________________________________ slf4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/slf4j-dev
