Re: [Hawkular-dev] What should be the replacement for printlns in tests?
On Jan 27, 2016, at 10:28 AM, Peter Palaga <ppalaga(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
On 2016-01-27 15:32, Jay Shaughnessy wrote:
>
> Yes, of course, that's the usefulness of loggers, but that doesn't mean
> system println is worse than INFO logging in test code.
Yes, println is worse than INFO logging because there e.g. is no way how
you can pointedly turn printlns off for a given class.
> Meaning, to the
> point of adding checkstyle misery.
@Matt perhaps wants to say something ? :)
Checkstyle or not, I found myself adding printlns because I have not
seen a better alternative.
So there is nobody here who knows how to config the test logging with
jboss.logging?
I haven’t paid too close attention to this thread, so maybe I missed some details. But why
can’t you just use logack like we do in metrics as Thomas described?
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 9.6 KB)