using InternalLogger in Netty's wrapper
Piotr Findeisen
piotr.findeisen at gmail.com
Tue Jun 23 05:24:03 EDT 2009
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
More information about the netty-users
mailing list