using InternalLogger in Netty's wrapper

[Piotr Findeisen]

Great thanks for the explanation.
I'll where directed :)

best regards!
Piotr


On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:20, "이희승 (Trustin Lee)" <trustin at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Piotr,
>
> Ideally, all frameworks and libraries could use the same logging
> framework (java.util.logging) or facade (like commons-logging or slf4j),
> but the reality is some people prefers a particular framework (or even
> facade) to others.  Therefore, sticking to only one logging framework
> will often make your users complain.  That's why I wrote a thin logging
> layer that is just enough for Netty itself.
>
> For the same reason, I was suggesting you to provide your own logging
> layer, but it's up to you.  I think using SLF4J is not a bad idea at
> all.  It's a great facade although it makes some beginners confused and
> some people prefers commons logging or just java.util.logging.
>
> However, if you are going to use Netty's logging layer and expose it to
> users directly, you are exposing a logger that is optimized for Netty,
> not yours.  Its behavior is subject to change at any time to serve the
> need of Netty itself, not yours.  It actually contains some code that is
> specific to Netty class names.
>
> I know, in most cases, there will be code duplication and its waste of
> time and space, but I think this issue should be addressed in a
> different project like code generator or byte code manipulator.  Until
> then, I'd live with code duplication or just choose SLF4J or commons
> logging.
>
> BTW, to change the logging framework in Netty, you can call
> InternalLoggerFactory.setDefaultFactory(), and it's absolutely fine.  I
> did never say that it's prohibited to use InternalLoggerFactory. :)
> What's not recommended is to access an InternalLogger, not an
> InternalLoggerFactory.  So.. your users can call it, too, although it
> wouldn't look that beautiful.
>
> HTH,
> Trustin
>
> On 2009-06-23 오후 5:50, Piotr Findeisen wrote:
> > Hi, Trustin
> >
> > So should I copy part or the whole Netty's InternalLoggerFactory?
> > If I'm going to support logging framework that Netty supports, it would
> > mean to copy Netty's code. Well, I very much don't like to copy code --
> > this is the reason of my question.
> >
> > Why InternalLogger is marked as internal? What bad can happen if I use
> > it? Maybe it could stop being internal?
> > Or -- should I use an external factory that serves similar purpose? I
> > haven't used it, but maybe SLF4J does the job?
> >
> > regards,
> > Piotr
> >
> >
> >     If you are going to provide a logging layer similar to what Netty
> >     provides, you could write your own InternalLoggerFactory
> implementation
> >     that redirects all logs to your logging layer.  It should be trivial
> to
> >     implement, and the users will not need to touch InternalLoggerFactory
> at
> >     all.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > netty-users mailing list
> > netty-users at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/netty-users
>
>
> --
> — Trustin Lee, http://gleamynode.net/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netty-users mailing list
> netty-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/netty-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/netty-users/attachments/20090623/d9f135f4/attachment.html