I know what you mean, but maybe he doesn't really need what log4j offers in better ways than jdk1.4 I use it for very simple logging and have no problems with it.
On Wed, 2003-02-19 at 12:57, Shapira, Yoav wrote: > > Howdy, > > >What do you think of this opinion: I am inclined to use the JDK1.4 > >logger just because it's included in rt.jar, thus fewer jars and > shorter > >classpath, and all that. > > I think everyone is free to have their own opinion. > > I don't think the length of the classpath is a relevant argument to > anything. I don't think JDK 1.4 is well implemented. I do think log4j > is superior in many ways. I do think using JDK 1.4 logging is a > mistake. I do think you should check out some of the documentation on > both packages, as well as comparisons available on this list's archives, > the log4j list archives, and the log4j documentation site. > > And all that ;) > > Yoav Shapira > Millennium ChemInformatics > > > > This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential business communication, >and may contain information that is confidential, proprietary and/or privileged. >This e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, and may >not be saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by anyone else. If you are not >the(an) intended recipient, please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer >system and notify the sender. Thank you. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- Felipe Schnack Analista de Sistemas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cel.: (51)91287530 Linux Counter #281893 Centro Universitário Ritter dos Reis http://www.ritterdosreis.br [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fone/Fax.: (51)32303341 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
