On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:34, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > > > Ah, as a side note: why are you guys always suggesting doing > > > getLogger()? couldn't we make the logger variable of AbstractLoggable > > > protected so that extending classes already have access to it and avoid > > > making method calls to retrieve it? it's both easier and faster, but > > > maybe you guys thought of something I'm forgetting, thus my questions. > > > > It is final so it will be inlined. Basically it is to avoid choosing the > > variable name between m_logger and logger. Some people hate m_ ;) > > Ok, good enough. > > Please, if possible, make this evident in the documentation or people > will percieve it as a speed problem.
okay - added a bit more of a blurb. -- Cheers, Pete *--------------------------------------------------* | Wise men don't need advice. Fools don't take it. | | -Benjamin Franklin | *--------------------------------------------------* -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
