Hi,
you don't have to pass the logger around. You can configure it once in the
main script and ask for it in child scripts. Every time you invoke
java.util.logging.Logger.getLogger('my-script-logger'), the same logger is
returned. This is true also if you use log4j or logback (better) instead of
java.util.logging.On 9 January 2016 at 02:15, Gerald Wiltse <jerrywil...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you both for your feedback. In my case, I don't think either > suggestion will work. Our scripts are all executed by a third party > application. We do not have control over most environment items, nor can I > pass startup options to the scripts. This puts me in a corner case, which > makes me feel like I'm going against the grain on this. > > For this case, everything must take place in the script, or in calls I > make from the script to other scripts, and then subsequent classes. I > already call children scripts, and pass in objects through binding. (def > shell = new GroovyShell(bindings).parse( scriptBody )) > > I'm considering a few alternatives for logging: > > 1. Creating a logger in step 1, passing it along to scripts and classes i > call > a. Tedious, yet seemingly straightforward > b. I assume possible, correct if wrong > 2. Creating a logger in step 1, using reflection/stacktrace to get > references back to it > a. Seems like I could make it work, but I don't even know if > actually possible > b. From what i've read, seems pretty ill-advised for efficiency > reasons > > To be honest, I don't like either, and it seems that there is no elegant > way to do the logging the way I am envisioning. Usually that means "You're > doing it wrong". I guess here, that means the third party app didn't > intend for people to be instantiating, calling custom classes, etc. It was > intended to be more basic. They also don't support grape and a few other > items that have made me engineer some things that would have otherwise been > simple in a vanilla groovy environment. > > Thanks again for everyone's help. > > > > Gerald R. Wiltse > jerrywil...@gmail.com > > > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Shil Sinha <shil.si...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Gerald, >> >> You can apply AST transformations to script classes using >> http://docs.groovy-lang.org/latest/html/documentation/#_ast_transformation_customizer >> . >> >> In your case, you'd need a script (called config.groovy in this example) >> that looks like this: >> >> withConfig(configuration) { ast(groovy.util.logging.Log) } >> >> When you run a script that you want @Log applied to (MyScript.groovy in >> this example), you'd call it as follows: >> >> groovy -configscript config.groovy MyScript.groovy >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Nelson, Erick [HDS] < >> erick.nel...@hdsupply.com> wrote: >> >>> I’m not sure if there is a better way to handle script logging. >>> >>> The annotations is for classes and you cannot apply it to your script >>> class. >>> >>> Another disadvantage is that I don’t think you can use the logger in >>> static methods. >>> >>> >>> >>> What you can do is ‘override’ the groovy Script class (the class that >>> your script is an instance of, kindof) by use the BaseScript annotation >>> >>> Example: >>> >>> Define your wrapper like this… >>> >>> >>> >>> -bash-4.1$ cat MyScript.groovy >>> >>> abstract class MyScript extends Script { >>> >>> java.util.logging.Logger log >>> >>> @Override def run () { >>> >>> log = java.util.logging.Logger.getLogger('') >>> >>> // any other startup stuff here…. >>> >>> runMyScript() >>> >>> // any other shutdown stuff here… >>> >>> } >>> >>> abstract def runMyScript() >>> >>> } >>> >>> >>> >>> Note that I have added a script variable called log that you can then >>> use in your script. >>> >>> >>> >>> Then in your script do something like this… >>> >>> >>> >>> @groovy.transform.BaseScript(MyScript) >>> >>> import groovy.util.* >>> >>> log.info 'hello' >>> >>> log.severe 'hello' >>> >>> >>> >>> sample run…. >>> >>> >>> >>> -bash-4.1$ groovy -Djava.util.logging.config.file=logging.properties >>> test.groovy >>> >>> Jan 8, 2016 11:53:04 AM java.util.logging.LogManager$RootLogger log >>> >>> INFO: hello >>> >>> Jan 8, 2016 11:53:04 AM java.util.logging.LogManager$RootLogger log >>> >>> SEVERE: hello >>> >>> >>> >>> The advantage here is that you can now add any other startup and >>> shutdown code in the base script class’s run method. >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Gerald Wiltse [mailto:jerrywil...@gmail.com] >>> *Sent:* Friday, January 08, 2016 11:01 AM >>> *To:* users@groovy.apache.org >>> *Subject:* @Log annotation inside Groovy Script >>> >>> >>> >>> I just got @Log to work in some test classes, then learned that @Log >>> annotations do not work in scripts. Is this true? If so, is there some >>> workaround that exists? I assume this is true for all @annotations and >>> scripts, so it seems pretty sad if there's no way to do it. >>> >>> >>> >>> I'm basing that conclusion on this post, and my own error. >>> >>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15981182/logging-in-groovy-script >>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__stackoverflow.com_questions_15981182_logging-2Din-2Dgroovy-2Dscript&d=BQMFaQ&c=_8VcuiJ--MukFqz6Sy5gel64o52_IbhiNdatg8Zb5Gs&r=X18JEC7WoH6AE_Xb-Yc-vOlw3Sre-zHIm9sFtf9hiJM&m=elRpgOr6t4A7M6hufAu_wLHNWUXEqqQZNu0dcjkJ7yg&s=VPldU_7pX8ccleusYK_YJ2P_Z9duECJ6fmtuy498rn8&e=> >>> >>> >>> >>> If that is the case, maybe someone can help me with a solution : >>> >>> >>> >>> Our use case is this: >>> >>> >>> >>> Our scripts are launched on a scheduled basis by the JVM >>> >>> Several class files are called throughout the execution of each script >>> >>> For each execution, we want the script and any called classes to share >>> one log >>> >>> This means all logging configuration would have to be programmatic / >>> dynamic >>> >>> >>> >>> The hope is that the script can define the log based on variables at >>> execution time, and then the classes will somehow "Inherit" the variable >>> from the script that called it. >>> >>> >>> >>> Does this seem possible? >>> >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Jerry >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
