You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to log4j-dev@logging.apache.org by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> on 2012/09/28 19:51:54 UTC
Testing in an IDE
Hi All,
I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run
org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because
org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null because
when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories instead of one:
[org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1,
org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
Can we be more lenient?
Instead of:
if (factories.size() != 1) {
logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging implementation");
} else {
factory = factories.get(0);
}
How about:
if (factories.size() != 1) {
logger.error("Expected a single logging implementation, not
{}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(), factories.get(0));
}
factory = factories.get(0);
?
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Tushar Kapila <tg...@gmail.com>.
No your not. Except calling a pre class with a set of properties will
be more flexible.
On 9/29/12, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand what you are saying, but if I do I am not worried
> about how the properties could be located. It would be easy for LogManager
> to do a System.getResource("log4j2.properties") and then require the
> application to have that somewhere on the classpath if they want to
> configure this. I'm just not certain if that is the best way to do it or
> not. I'm not sure I'd like to require a system property to be set to enable
> using the properties. If we do that they they might as well have to specify
> the items themselves as system properties.
>
> Am I missing what you are suggesting?
>
> Ralph
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:30 PM, Tushar Kapila wrote:
>
>> Java has a pre main. Like wise have another file xml or properties for
>> log4j but default null & disabled. Have to set system property to
>> enable it.
>>
>> On 9/29/12, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>> With just using a rank the test impl would be lower than the core impl
>>> and
>>> so the core impl would be chosen and yes. it would work.
>>>
>>> The user already has a way to specify the factory they want with a
>>> system
>>> property, but I'd prefer something better than that. It might be nice
>>> to
>>> allow a log4j2.properties file that can specify the LoggerContextFactory
>>> and
>>> ContextSelector and possibly other things. I'm not really sure about
>>> this -
>>> just looking for better ideas.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>>> OK, so back to:
>>>>
>>>> "I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of
>>>> information
>>>> to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the
>>>> configuration
>>>> factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank."
>>>>
>>>> So I really want my impl, I scan the system and edit some config file
>>>> and
>>>> use a higher rank? Seems for advanced users but workable.
>>>>
>>>> In the case I have today, the test impl would have a lower rank than
>>>> the
>>>> stock impl? Then it would work within an IDE. Check?
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Ralph Goers
>>>> <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> While it is consistent I wouldn't call it deterministic. For example,
>>>> JBoss 5 has an SLF4J implementation in common/lib. Your application may
>>>> have one in WEB-INF/lib. One of them will always win but how is it
>>>> deterministic which one it will be? What if it isn't the one you want?
>>>> What can be done to override it?
>>>>
>>>> Ralph
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:01 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Agree but doesn't the current code use the classpath order? If not,
>>>>> could
>>>>> it? That would be deterministic, just like I can place a jar at the
>>>>> front
>>>>> of the CP to override one or more classes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Ralph Goers
>>>>> <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> The problem I have is that it isn't deterministic and I very much
>>>>> dislike
>>>>> that. SLF4J is that way today and it is annoying that you can't
>>>>> guarantee the winner.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> What about just picking the first one like in the example below (note
>>>>>> the new error message)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 14:06, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test
>>>>>>> factory
>>>>>>> and the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would
>>>>>>> probably have the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run
>>>>>>> tests for anything in my IDE but always run Maven from the command
>>>>>>> line
>>>>>>> - even to debug.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but
>>>>>>> passing events to two logging implementations seems like a
>>>>>>> performance
>>>>>>> nightmare. Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a
>>>>>>> competitor
>>>>>>> or replacement for SLF4J.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of
>>>>>>> information
>>>>>>> to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the
>>>>>>> configuration factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest
>>>>>>> rank.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run
>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because
>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null
>>>>>>>> because when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories
>>>>>>>> instead of one:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1,
>>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can we be more lenient?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Instead of:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>>>>>> logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging
>>>>>>>> implementation");
>>>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How about:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>>>>>> logger.error("Expected a single logging
>>>>>>>> implementation, not {}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(),
>>>>>>>> factories.get(0));
>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my mobile device
>>
>> Regards
>> Tushar Kapila
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
>
--
Sent from my mobile device
Regards
Tushar Kapila
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
I'm not sure I understand what you are saying, but if I do I am not worried about how the properties could be located. It would be easy for LogManager to do a System.getResource("log4j2.properties") and then require the application to have that somewhere on the classpath if they want to configure this. I'm just not certain if that is the best way to do it or not. I'm not sure I'd like to require a system property to be set to enable using the properties. If we do that they they might as well have to specify the items themselves as system properties.
Am I missing what you are suggesting?
Ralph
On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:30 PM, Tushar Kapila wrote:
> Java has a pre main. Like wise have another file xml or properties for
> log4j but default null & disabled. Have to set system property to
> enable it.
>
> On 9/29/12, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>> With just using a rank the test impl would be lower than the core impl and
>> so the core impl would be chosen and yes. it would work.
>>
>> The user already has a way to specify the factory they want with a system
>> property, but I'd prefer something better than that. It might be nice to
>> allow a log4j2.properties file that can specify the LoggerContextFactory and
>> ContextSelector and possibly other things. I'm not really sure about this -
>> just looking for better ideas.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>>> OK, so back to:
>>>
>>> "I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information
>>> to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration
>>> factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank."
>>>
>>> So I really want my impl, I scan the system and edit some config file and
>>> use a higher rank? Seems for advanced users but workable.
>>>
>>> In the case I have today, the test impl would have a lower rank than the
>>> stock impl? Then it would work within an IDE. Check?
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> While it is consistent I wouldn't call it deterministic. For example,
>>> JBoss 5 has an SLF4J implementation in common/lib. Your application may
>>> have one in WEB-INF/lib. One of them will always win but how is it
>>> deterministic which one it will be? What if it isn't the one you want?
>>> What can be done to override it?
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:01 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>>> Agree but doesn't the current code use the classpath order? If not, could
>>>> it? That would be deterministic, just like I can place a jar at the front
>>>> of the CP to override one or more classes.
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> The problem I have is that it isn't deterministic and I very much dislike
>>>> that. SLF4J is that way today and it is annoying that you can't
>>>> guarantee the winner.
>>>>
>>>> Ralph
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What about just picking the first one like in the example below (note
>>>>> the new error message)
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 14:06, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test factory
>>>>>> and the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would
>>>>>> probably have the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run
>>>>>> tests for anything in my IDE but always run Maven from the command line
>>>>>> - even to debug.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but
>>>>>> passing events to two logging implementations seems like a performance
>>>>>> nightmare. Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a competitor
>>>>>> or replacement for SLF4J.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information
>>>>>> to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the
>>>>>> configuration factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest
>>>>>> rank.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run
>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because
>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null
>>>>>>> because when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories
>>>>>>> instead of one:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1,
>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can we be more lenient?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Instead of:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>>>>> logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging
>>>>>>> implementation");
>>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>>>>> logger.error("Expected a single logging
>>>>>>> implementation, not {}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(),
>>>>>>> factories.get(0));
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>>
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
>
> Regards
> Tushar Kapila
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Tushar Kapila <tg...@gmail.com>.
Java has a pre main. Like wise have another file xml or properties for
log4j but default null & disabled. Have to set system property to
enable it.
On 9/29/12, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> With just using a rank the test impl would be lower than the core impl and
> so the core impl would be chosen and yes. it would work.
>
> The user already has a way to specify the factory they want with a system
> property, but I'd prefer something better than that. It might be nice to
> allow a log4j2.properties file that can specify the LoggerContextFactory and
> ContextSelector and possibly other things. I'm not really sure about this -
> just looking for better ideas.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
>> OK, so back to:
>>
>> "I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information
>> to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration
>> factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank."
>>
>> So I really want my impl, I scan the system and edit some config file and
>> use a higher rank? Seems for advanced users but workable.
>>
>> In the case I have today, the test impl would have a lower rank than the
>> stock impl? Then it would work within an IDE. Check?
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>> wrote:
>> While it is consistent I wouldn't call it deterministic. For example,
>> JBoss 5 has an SLF4J implementation in common/lib. Your application may
>> have one in WEB-INF/lib. One of them will always win but how is it
>> deterministic which one it will be? What if it isn't the one you want?
>> What can be done to override it?
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:01 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>>> Agree but doesn't the current code use the classpath order? If not, could
>>> it? That would be deterministic, just like I can place a jar at the front
>>> of the CP to override one or more classes.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> The problem I have is that it isn't deterministic and I very much dislike
>>> that. SLF4J is that way today and it is annoying that you can't
>>> guarantee the winner.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>>> What about just picking the first one like in the example below (note
>>>> the new error message)
>>>>
>>>> Gary
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 14:06, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test factory
>>>>> and the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would
>>>>> probably have the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run
>>>>> tests for anything in my IDE but always run Maven from the command line
>>>>> - even to debug.
>>>>>
>>>>> At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but
>>>>> passing events to two logging implementations seems like a performance
>>>>> nightmare. Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a competitor
>>>>> or replacement for SLF4J.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information
>>>>> to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the
>>>>> configuration factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest
>>>>> rank.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run
>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because
>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null
>>>>>> because when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories
>>>>>> instead of one:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1,
>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can we be more lenient?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Instead of:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>>>> logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging
>>>>>> implementation");
>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>>>> logger.error("Expected a single logging
>>>>>> implementation, not {}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(),
>>>>>> factories.get(0));
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
--
Sent from my mobile device
Regards
Tushar Kapila
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscribe@logging.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-help@logging.apache.org
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
With just using a rank the test impl would be lower than the core impl and so the core impl would be chosen and yes. it would work.
The user already has a way to specify the factory they want with a system property, but I'd prefer something better than that. It might be nice to allow a log4j2.properties file that can specify the LoggerContextFactory and ContextSelector and possibly other things. I'm not really sure about this - just looking for better ideas.
Ralph
On Sep 28, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> OK, so back to:
>
> "I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank."
>
> So I really want my impl, I scan the system and edit some config file and use a higher rank? Seems for advanced users but workable.
>
> In the case I have today, the test impl would have a lower rank than the stock impl? Then it would work within an IDE. Check?
>
> Gary
>
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> While it is consistent I wouldn't call it deterministic. For example, JBoss 5 has an SLF4J implementation in common/lib. Your application may have one in WEB-INF/lib. One of them will always win but how is it deterministic which one it will be? What if it isn't the one you want? What can be done to override it?
>
> Ralph
>
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:01 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
>> Agree but doesn't the current code use the classpath order? If not, could it? That would be deterministic, just like I can place a jar at the front of the CP to override one or more classes.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>> The problem I have is that it isn't deterministic and I very much dislike that. SLF4J is that way today and it is annoying that you can't guarantee the winner.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>>> What about just picking the first one like in the example below (note the new error message)
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 14:06, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test factory and the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would probably have the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run tests for anything in my IDE but always run Maven from the command line - even to debug.
>>>>
>>>> At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but passing events to two logging implementations seems like a performance nightmare. Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a competitor or replacement for SLF4J.
>>>>
>>>> I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank.
>>>>
>>>> Ralph
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null because when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories instead of one:
>>>>>
>>>>> [org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1, org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
>>>>>
>>>>> Can we be more lenient?
>>>>>
>>>>> Instead of:
>>>>>
>>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>>> logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging implementation");
>>>>> } else {
>>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> How about:
>>>>>
>>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>>> logger.error("Expected a single logging implementation, not {}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(), factories.get(0));
>>>>> }
>>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>>>
>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
OK, so back to:
"I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information to
the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration
factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank."
So I really want my impl, I scan the system and edit some config file and
use a higher rank? Seems for advanced users but workable.
In the case I have today, the test impl would have a lower rank than the
stock impl? Then it would work within an IDE. Check?
Gary
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>wrote:
> While it is consistent I wouldn't call it deterministic. For example,
> JBoss 5 has an SLF4J implementation in common/lib. Your application may
> have one in WEB-INF/lib. One of them will always win but how is it
> deterministic which one it will be? What if it isn't the one you want?
> What can be done to override it?
>
> Ralph
>
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:01 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Agree but doesn't the current code use the classpath order? If not, could
> it? That would be deterministic, just like I can place a jar at the front
> of the CP to override one or more classes.
>
> Gary
>
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>wrote:
>
>> The problem I have is that it isn't deterministic and I very much dislike
>> that. SLF4J is that way today and it is annoying that you can't guarantee
>> the winner.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>> What about just picking the first one like in the example below (note the
>> new error message)
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 14:06, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test factory
>> and the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would probably
>> have the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run tests for
>> anything in my IDE but always run Maven from the command line - even to
>> debug.
>>
>> At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but passing
>> events to two logging implementations seems like a performance nightmare.
>> Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a competitor or replacement
>> for SLF4J.
>>
>> I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information
>> to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration
>> factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run
>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because
>> org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null because
>> when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories instead of one:
>>
>> [org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1,
>> org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
>>
>> Can we be more lenient?
>>
>> Instead of:
>>
>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>> logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging implementation");
>> } else {
>> factory = factories.get(0);
>> }
>>
>> How about:
>>
>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>> logger.error("Expected a single logging implementation,
>> not {}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(), factories.get(0));
>> }
>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>
>> ?
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977/>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>> Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977/>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
> Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
While it is consistent I wouldn't call it deterministic. For example, JBoss 5 has an SLF4J implementation in common/lib. Your application may have one in WEB-INF/lib. One of them will always win but how is it deterministic which one it will be? What if it isn't the one you want? What can be done to override it?
Ralph
On Sep 28, 2012, at 1:01 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Agree but doesn't the current code use the classpath order? If not, could it? That would be deterministic, just like I can place a jar at the front of the CP to override one or more classes.
>
> Gary
>
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> The problem I have is that it isn't deterministic and I very much dislike that. SLF4J is that way today and it is annoying that you can't guarantee the winner.
>
> Ralph
>
>
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
>> What about just picking the first one like in the example below (note the new error message)
>>
>> Gary
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 14:06, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>
>>> That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test factory and the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would probably have the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run tests for anything in my IDE but always run Maven from the command line - even to debug.
>>>
>>> At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but passing events to two logging implementations seems like a performance nightmare. Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a competitor or replacement for SLF4J.
>>>
>>> I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null because when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories instead of one:
>>>>
>>>> [org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1, org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
>>>>
>>>> Can we be more lenient?
>>>>
>>>> Instead of:
>>>>
>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>> logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging implementation");
>>>> } else {
>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> How about:
>>>>
>>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>>> logger.error("Expected a single logging implementation, not {}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(), factories.get(0));
>>>> }
>>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>>
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Agree but doesn't the current code use the classpath order? If not, could
it? That would be deterministic, just like I can place a jar at the front
of the CP to override one or more classes.
Gary
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>wrote:
> The problem I have is that it isn't deterministic and I very much dislike
> that. SLF4J is that way today and it is annoying that you can't guarantee
> the winner.
>
> Ralph
>
>
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> What about just picking the first one like in the example below (note the
> new error message)
>
> Gary
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 14:06, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
> That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test factory and
> the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would probably have
> the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run tests for anything in
> my IDE but always run Maven from the command line - even to debug.
>
> At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but passing
> events to two logging implementations seems like a performance nightmare.
> Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a competitor or replacement
> for SLF4J.
>
> I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information to
> the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration
> factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank.
>
> Ralph
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run
> org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because
> org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null because
> when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories instead of one:
>
> [org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1,
> org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
>
> Can we be more lenient?
>
> Instead of:
>
> if (factories.size() != 1) {
> logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging implementation");
> } else {
> factory = factories.get(0);
> }
>
> How about:
>
> if (factories.size() != 1) {
> logger.error("Expected a single logging implementation,
> not {}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(), factories.get(0));
> }
> factory = factories.get(0);
>
> ?
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977/>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
> Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
>
>
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
The problem I have is that it isn't deterministic and I very much dislike that. SLF4J is that way today and it is annoying that you can't guarantee the winner.
Ralph
On Sep 28, 2012, at 11:21 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> What about just picking the first one like in the example below (note the new error message)
>
> Gary
>
> On Sep 28, 2012, at 14:06, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
>> That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test factory and the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would probably have the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run tests for anything in my IDE but always run Maven from the command line - even to debug.
>>
>> At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but passing events to two logging implementations seems like a performance nightmare. Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a competitor or replacement for SLF4J.
>>
>> I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>> On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null because when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories instead of one:
>>>
>>> [org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1, org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
>>>
>>> Can we be more lenient?
>>>
>>> Instead of:
>>>
>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>> logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging implementation");
>>> } else {
>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>> }
>>>
>>> How about:
>>>
>>> if (factories.size() != 1) {
>>> logger.error("Expected a single logging implementation, not {}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(), factories.get(0));
>>> }
>>> factory = factories.get(0);
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> --
>>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>>> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
>>> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
What about just picking the first one like in the example below (note the
new error message)
Gary
On Sep 28, 2012, at 14:06, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test factory and
the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would probably have
the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run tests for anything in
my IDE but always run Maven from the command line - even to debug.
At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but passing
events to two logging implementations seems like a performance nightmare.
Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a competitor or replacement
for SLF4J.
I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information to
the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration
factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank.
Ralph
On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
Hi All,
I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run
org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because
org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null because
when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories instead of one:
[org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1,
org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
Can we be more lenient?
Instead of:
if (factories.size() != 1) {
logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging implementation");
} else {
factory = factories.get(0);
}
How about:
if (factories.size() != 1) {
logger.error("Expected a single logging implementation, not
{}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(), factories.get(0));
}
factory = factories.get(0);
?
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: <http://goog_1249600977/>http://bit.ly/ECvg0
Spring Batch in Action: <http://s.apache.org/HOq>http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Re: Testing in an IDE
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
That is interesting. So Eclipse is seeing both the API's test factory and the real implementation. I guess that makes sense. I would probably have the same problem in IntelliJ except that I never run tests for anything in my IDE but always run Maven from the command line - even to debug.
At one point I considered allowing multiple implementations, but passing events to two logging implementations seems like a performance nightmare. Also, the Log4j 2 API isn't really intended as a competitor or replacement for SLF4J.
I think a better way to do this is to add one more piece of information to the meta-data - a rank/weight as is being done with the configuration factory. Then we will pick the one with the highest rank.
Ralph
On Sep 28, 2012, at 10:51 AM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am using Eclipse as my IDE and when I run org.apache.logging.log4j.core.BasicLoggingTest I get an NPE because org.apache.logging.log4j.LogManager.factory is null. It is null because when the static initializer runs it picks up 2 factories instead of one:
>
> [org.apache.logging.log4j.core.impl.Log4jContextFactory@39c8c1, org.apache.logging.log4j.SimpleLoggerContextFactory@1ab2b55].
>
> Can we be more lenient?
>
> Instead of:
>
> if (factories.size() != 1) {
> logger.fatal("Unable to locate a logging implementation");
> } else {
> factory = factories.get(0);
> }
>
> How about:
>
> if (factories.size() != 1) {
> logger.error("Expected a single logging implementation, not {}, picking the first: {}", factories.size(), factories.get(0));
> }
> factory = factories.get(0);
>
> ?
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> JUnit in Action, 2nd Ed: http://bit.ly/ECvg0
> Spring Batch in Action: http://bit.ly/bqpbCK
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory