On 18 Nov 2008, at 18:43, Ceki Gulcu wrote:
>
>
> However, printing caller information is different than naming
> loggers after the
> method as Robert described in his email.
>
Indeed - it was to allow fine grained control of trace output that I
was doing it. I guess you could use a filter t
Robert Elliot skrev den 18-11-2008 10:39:
> I have an AspectJ project I'm working on to add trace logging via SLF4J on
> method & constructor entry & exit & variable change. I'll put it up
> as an enhancement JIRA once I've done a little more work on it.
>
That would be really nice. Looki
Hi guys!
>>> This is a really neat idea, which might also work well with the Eclipse
>>> Console plugin.
>>>
>>> I cannot count the times I've pasted a stack trace in the Java Stack
>>> Trace pane on the Console to be able to navigate.
>>>
>> I am not sure we're talking about the same thing,
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Maarten Bosteels skrev:
> >
> >
> > I cannot count the times I've pasted a stack trace in the Java Stack
> > Trace pane on the Console to be able to navigate.
> >
> >
> > I am not sure we're talking about
Maarten Bosteels skrev:
>
>
> I cannot count the times I've pasted a stack trace in the Java Stack
> Trace pane on the Console to be able to navigate.
>
>
> I am not sure we're talking about the same thing, but have you heard
> of JumpToCode ?
> It's a plugin for IntelliJ IDEA that listens
Ralph Goers skrev:
>
>>
>>
> Why? Logback already gives automatically gives you access to the class
> and method name.
>
I have not looked much into the features of logback yet, so I am just
burdened of the mindset of log4j where call stack probing was expensive
and not recommended.
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Maarten Bosteels
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen <[EMAIL
> PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> Robert Elliot skrev:
>> > Thanks - I checked the slf4j-ext project when I started, but not the
>> Subversion repository. I pres
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Robert Elliot skrev:
> > Thanks - I checked the slf4j-ext project when I started, but not the
> Subversion repository. I presume this is a post-compile step rather than
> runtime byte code alteration?
> >
> >
>
Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen wrote:
>
>> 3) loggers named after the class and method / field name, so you can be more
>> fine grained in what output you get
>>
>>
> Actually this is something I've noticed that java.util.logging can do -
> determine the method name of the caller - without any
On 18 Nov 2008, at 18:43, Ceki Gulcu wrote:
>
>
> However, printing caller information is different than naming
> loggers after the
> method as Robert described in his email.
>
Indeed - it was to allow fine grained control of trace output that I
was doing it. I guess you could use a filter t
Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen wrote:
> Ceki Gulcu skrev:
>> Log4j can also determine the caller as can logback. Logback can also
>> determine
>> and print the caller of the caller, or the caller of the caller of the
>> caller.
>> See http://logback.qos.ch/manual/layouts.html#ClassicPatternLayout and
Ceki Gulcu skrev:
> Log4j can also determine the caller as can logback. Logback can also
> determine
> and print the caller of the caller, or the caller of the caller of the
> caller.
> See http://logback.qos.ch/manual/layouts.html#ClassicPatternLayout and then
> search for the "caller" convers
Just chipping in.
Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen wrote:
>
>> 3) loggers named after the class and method / field name, so you can be more
>> fine grained
>> in what output you get
> Actually this is something I've noticed that java.util.logging can do -
> determine the method name of the caller -
Robert Elliot skrev:
> Thanks - I checked the slf4j-ext project when I started, but not the
> Subversion repository. I presume this is a post-compile step rather than
> runtime byte code alteration?
>
>
(I got the strange feeling of already having answered this, but I'm not
sure, so I'll jus
Ceki Gulcu skrev:
> Hello Robert,
>
> Robert Elliot wrote:
> > Thanks - I checked the slf4j-ext project when I started, but not the
> > Subversion repository. I presume this is a post-compile step rather
> > than runtime byte code alteration?
>
> No, the Agent extensions perform byte code engin
Robert Elliot wrote:
> Sorry, I guess I was thinking that you could be modifying the byte
> code as a post compile step, if you see what I mean, but closer
> inspection of the discussion should have shown me you were talking
> about instrumentation at runtime.
No worries.
> I see the diff
t wouldn't be
too difficult to achieve.
Rob
- Original Message -
From: "Ceki Gulcu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "logback developers list"
Sent: Tuesday, 18 November, 2008 4:23:37 PM GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland,
Portugal
Subject: Re: [logback-dev] Least-e
Hello Robert,
Robert Elliot wrote:
> Thanks - I checked the slf4j-ext project when I started, but not the
> Subversion repository. I presume this is a post-compile step rather
> than runtime byte code alteration?
No, the Agent extensions perform byte code engineering at
runtime. BTW, the subj
, 18 November, 2008 3:37:12 PM GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland,
Portugal
Subject: Re: [logback-dev] Least-effort logging with bytecode modification
You should have a look at the slf4j extensions project first. There is
something in development there.
Robert Elliot wrote:
> I have an AspectJ
AM GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland,
> Portugal
> Subject: Re: [logback-dev] Least-effort logging with bytecode modification
>
> Ramon Nogueira skrev den 26-07-2008 05:01:
>
>> I thought of implementing this with AspectJ but its probably easier to
>> just use ASM d
Ravn Andersen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "logback developers list"
Sent: Saturday, 26 July, 2008 8:50:07 AM GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland,
Portugal
Subject: Re: [logback-dev] Least-effort logging with bytecode modification
Ramon Nogueira skrev den 26-07-2008 05:01:
> I th
Ramon Nogueira skrev den 26-07-2008 05:01:
> I thought of implementing this with AspectJ but its probably easier to
> just use ASM directly for such a simple case.
>
> Any ideas/suggestions/precedents?
>
You might find
http://today.java.net/pub/a/today/2008/04/24/add-logging-at-class-load-time
Hi
At the company I work for we use the same logging pattern almost
everywhere, for example:
public class SomeClass {
private static final Logger log =
LoggerFactory.getLogger(SomeClass.class);
public void someMethod() {
log.debug("A log message");
}
}
I
23 matches
Mail list logo
