I'm using SLF4J with Log4J underneath. What access levels should I be setting my loggers to?
static final Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(ClassName.class);
views:
130answers:
2
+11
A:
I think you should use private access level, because every class should have its own copy of logger. Otherwise we can't tell which class really did the log record.
Ivan Nevostruev
2009-10-09 19:13:20
Makes sense, I ask because the SLF4J documentation left off the access modifier, so I didn't know if there were situations where you needed other classes to access the logger.
James McMahon
2009-10-09 19:30:34
Classes internal to the logging system may need to, but they maintain their own references anyway.
David Berger
2009-10-09 19:34:16
+2
A:
I always set them to private. Is there any reason any other class would need access to this logger?
Bill the Lizard
2009-10-09 19:14:44
I've seen some people that will design superclasses in a way that a logger is exposed to the child classes
matt b
2009-10-09 19:54:13
I've actually done that Matt, protected access makes sense to me in that case.
James McMahon
2009-10-09 20:03:07
@matt b: I've never seen that before. I'll have to try it out to see what it does to the log record.
Bill the Lizard
2009-10-09 20:08:02
`protected`? that's hideous. `protected static` is always a mistake.
Tom Hawtin - tackline
2009-10-09 20:11:51
You'll see that sometimes in frameworks like Spring, where you might extend one of their controllers or DaoSupport classes. The loggers will be declared as protected final Logger log = LogManager.getLogger(this.getClass()), so that they'll be the runtime class's type.
matt b
2009-10-09 20:45:04
@matt b, yeah that is exactly what I was doing. For protected loggers I don't use static.
James McMahon
2009-10-09 22:12:09