Nice discussion.

Goes further than I had thought. This pushes efficiency even further.

I like it.

From: logback-user-bounces@qos.ch [mailto:logback-user-bounces@qos.ch] On Behalf Of Chris Pratt
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013 10:54 AM
To: logback users list
Subject: Re: [logback-user] commons-logging -> sl4j -> logback

I have a bit of a discussion on why a more robust formatting option is desirable.  Check out http://code.google.com/p/anodyzed/wiki/Log

and please feel free to ask any questions that come to mind.

  (*Chris*)

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Brett Walker <brett.walker@geometryit.com> wrote:

It’s may bad. {} is the only syntax allowed

It would be a nice addition to have positional, but how warranted is it?

Brett

From: logback-user-bounces@qos.ch [mailto:logback-user-bounces@qos.ch] On Behalf Of David Harkness
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2013 10:46 AM

To: logback users list
Subject: Re: [logback-user] commons-logging -> sl4j -> logback

On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Brett Walker <brett.walker@geometryit.com> wrote:

This avoids calling the toString() method on the objects until the log message is actually required to be logged.

Sorry, Brett, I changed the subject without actually changing the subject since it was semi-related. :) I was asking about "{0}" versus "{}".

David

_______________________________________________
Logback-user mailing list
Logback-user@qos.ch
http://mailman.qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-user