<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid6.0.3.0.0.20050810122122.03751d18@torino"
type="cite">I'll update the SLF4J web-site so that simple-log is
listed as an
<br>
implementation supporting the SLF4J API.
<br>
</blockquote>
Excellent. Thanks.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid6.0.3.0.0.20050810122122.03751d18@torino"
type="cite">If you look at the the *not-yet-released* 1.0beta5 API
[1], you will
<br>
notice several changes, all assumed to be for the better. There are
<br>
two main changes. First, support for org.slf4j.Marker interface was
<br>
added as a first-class item in org.slf4j.Loggger interface.</blockquote>
Just from looking at the API for Marker & the associated Logger
methods, I can't quite figure what the intended use is. <span
class="moz-smiley-s6"><span> :-[ </span></span><br>
Could you give me an example of when it would need to be used and how?<br>
<blockquote cite="mid6.0.3.0.0.20050810122122.03751d18@torino"
type="cite">Second,
<br>
LoggerFactoryAdapter was renamed as ILoggerFactory. In my humble
<br>
opinion, the old name was too much of a mouthful. In addition, the
<br>
interface now contains a single method instead of the previous two.
<br>
</blockquote>
Name changes don't really bother me, but I don't really like
single-letter prefixes in class/interface names. (That's a personal
preference.)<br>
I think it's misleading in this case because LoggerFactory doesn't
implement ILoggerFactory, which might throw a lot of people.<br>
(I think EJB people are used to having the interface prefixed with 'I'
and the implementation being the same name without the 'I'?)<br>
<br>
It's all very hard, though, because the terms being used here -
'Factory' and 'Adapter' - are very loaded, and people have certain
expectations of classes that have these names.<br>
I faced the same problem when I wrote <a
href="http://home.exetel.com.au/grlea/projects/log-bridge/api/org/grlea/logBridge/package-summary.html">Log
Bridge</a> and ended up calling the LoggerFactory equivalent there
'LogBridgeManager'.<br>
<br>
I think the interface now called ILoggerFactory really is an adapter
for the logger factory, so LoggerFactoryAdapter would probably be my
preference.<br>
I tend to prefer clarity over brevity, where practical.<br>
Seeing as it should only be SLF4J implementers who are implementing the
interface, I wouldn't consider brevity to be warranted in this
situation.<br>
In the end, though, I'm not really that concerned what it's called, as
long as the javadoc makes it really clear what it is.<br>
Another option you could consider would be making ILoggerFactory an
inner-interface of LoggerFactory called simply 'Adapter'.<br>
<br>
Anyway, enough blabbering.<br>
I'm really keen to hear back about the Marker. <span
class="moz-smiley-s1"><span> :-) </span></span><br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
Graham.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>