Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #12799
| From | Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Question about loggers |
| Date | 2012-03-09 07:11 -0800 |
| Organization | http://groups.google.com |
| Message-ID | <17863687.969.1331305893320.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vblb5> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <XnsA00FC1E7AC0A8jpnasty@94.75.214.39> <4f57fc25$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <jjair3$63e$1@news.albasani.net> <29668555.311.1331223311031.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfv2> <jjase9$fo2$1@dont-email.me> |
On Thursday, March 8, 2012 7:05:57 PM UTC+1, markspace wrote: > On 3/8/2012 8:15 AM, Robert Klemme wrote: > > > > We should mention that this is not exactly equivalent from the > > logging point of view. > > Also be aware that while static loggers are common in Java in general, > instance loggers are recommended best practice according the the Apache > Commons website. I think this is not exactly true if you are referring to this: "Note that for application code, declaring the log member as "static" is more efficient as one Log object is created per class, and is recommended. However this is not safe to do for a class which may be deployed via a "shared" classloader in a servlet or j2ee container or similar environment. If the class may end up invoked with different thread-context-classloader values set then the member must not be declared static. The use of "static" should therefore be avoided in code within any "library" type project." http://commons.apache.org/logging/guide.html Truth is that static loggers are recommended for application code; only for library code they recommend against static loggers. Kind regards robert
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Question about loggers Novice <novice@example..com> - 2012-03-07 21:52 +0000
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-07 17:16 -0500
Re: Question about loggers Novice <novice@example..com> - 2012-03-07 23:57 +0000
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-07 19:24 -0500
Re: Question about loggers Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-03-08 07:22 -0800
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-08 10:27 -0500
Re: Question about loggers Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-03-08 11:58 -0800
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-08 15:49 -0500
Re: Question about loggers Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-03-08 08:15 -0800
Re: Question about loggers markspace <-@.> - 2012-03-08 10:05 -0800
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-08 13:50 -0500
Re: Question about loggers Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-03-09 07:11 -0800
Re: Question about loggers Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-03-09 07:45 -0800
Re: Question about loggers markspace <-@.> - 2012-03-09 07:54 -0800
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-09 11:03 -0500
Re: Question about loggers markspace <-@.> - 2012-03-09 09:10 -0800
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-09 12:27 -0500
Re: Question about loggers Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-03-09 10:56 -0800
Re: Question about loggers Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-03-09 20:29 +0100
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-09 11:04 -0500
Re: Question about loggers markspace <-@.> - 2012-03-09 09:14 -0800
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-09 12:22 -0500
Re: Question about loggers Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-03-09 10:58 -0800
Re: Question about loggers markspace <-@.> - 2012-03-07 15:21 -0800
Re: Question about loggers Novice <novice@example..com> - 2012-03-08 00:01 +0000
Re: Question about loggers Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-03-07 19:21 -0500
Re: Question about loggers Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-03-08 06:18 -0400
csiph-web