You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@logging.apache.org by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> on 2017/06/01 18:07:04 UTC

[log4j2] MapMessage.newInstance(Map)

Hi All,

It looks like:

org.apache.logging.log4j.message.MapMessage.newInstance(Map<String, String>)

was supposed to be a static method.

Can't change it now I suppose :-( as it would break BC.

I wonder if we should start tracking these TODOs with // TODO Fix for 3.0
comments?

Gary

Re: [log4j2] MapMessage.newInstance(Map)

Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.

My mistake, It looks like it is implemented and used to return an instance
of its own type (different subclasses return a different type)

Gary

On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Mikael Ståldal <mi...@apache.org> wrote:

> Maybe we should deprecate it?
>
>
> On 2017-06-01 21:07, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> It looks like:
>>
>> org.apache.logging.log4j.message.MapMessage.newInstance(Map<String,
>> String>)
>>
>> was supposed to be a static method.
>>
>> Can't change it now I suppose :-( as it would break BC.
>>
>> I wonder if we should start tracking these TODOs with // TODO Fix for 3.0
>> comments?
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>

Re: [log4j2] MapMessage.newInstance(Map)

Posted by Mikael Ståldal <mi...@apache.org>.

Maybe we should deprecate it?

On 2017-06-01 21:07, Gary Gregory wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> It looks like:
> 
> org.apache.logging.log4j.message.MapMessage.newInstance(Map<String, String>)
> 
> was supposed to be a static method.
> 
> Can't change it now I suppose :-( as it would break BC.
> 
> I wonder if we should start tracking these TODOs with // TODO Fix for 3.0
> comments?
> 
> Gary
>