Re: [Codenarc-user] LoggerWithWrongModifiersRule supporting subclasses

[Hamlet D. <ham...@ca...>]

Personally, I would require loggers to be static, private, and final. 
If someone really needed a protected logger then i would still make it static and final, just protected. 

So I think we need both these settings. 



----- Original Message -----
> That's a great question.
> 
> I do use that pattern in framework superclasses:
> 	protected final LOG = Logger.getLogger(this.class)
> 
> to provide a built-in logger for all subclasses. And so I have to
> configure
> exceptions for this rule for those superclasses.
> 
> Is there any value in splitting up the "exception" configuration into
> two
> properties, if we do allow it?
>   * allowNonStaticLogger
>   * allowProtectedLogger
> 
> Are there use cases we can envision where we (or anyone) would choose
> to
> allow non-static but not protected, or vice versa?
> 
> Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hamlet D'Arcy [mailto:ham...@gm...]
> Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 2:50 AM
> To: René Scheibe; Cod...@li...
> Subject: [Codenarc-user] LoggerWithWrongModifiersRule supporting
> subclasses
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> This email is about the idea about the LoggerWithWrongModifiersRule
> supporting subclasses.
> 
> René filed an issue (and supplied a patch) describing the issue:
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=3308930&group_id=2
> 50145&atid=1126575#
> 
> Basically, the question is how subclasses should be allowed to access
> a
> Logger in a parent class.
> 
> Normally Loggers are private, static, and final. This patch allows
> you to
> accept this as valid code when you turn a certain property on:
> 
>     protected final LOG = Logger.getLogger(this.class)
> 
> I'd like to discuss this just a little more before committing the
> patch.
> 
> With this change, it is acceptable to have a non-static logger. So
> each
> instance of a subclass makes and creates a logger. This does not seem
> right,
> and I would reject it in a code review as improper logging. I would
> accept
> this form though:
> 
>     protected static final LOG = Logger.getLogger(MyClass.class)
> 
> Do we really want to allow non-static Loggers?
> 
> if so, I recommend two new properties instead of just one:
>   * allowNonStaticLogger
>   * allowProtectedLogger
> 
> Then the user can control the behavior a little better.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Hamlet D'Arcy
> ham...@gm...
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> vRanger cuts backup time in half-while increasing security.
> With the market-leading solution for virtual backup and recovery, you
> get
> blazing-fast, flexible, and affordable data protection.
> Download your free trial now.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-d2dcopy1
> _______________________________________________
> Codenarc-user mailing list
> Cod...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-user
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Simplify data backup and recovery for your virtual environment with
> vRanger.
> Installation's a snap, and flexible recovery options mean your data
> is safe,
> secure and there when you need it. Data protection magic?
> Nope - It's vRanger. Get your free trial download today.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/quest-sfdev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Codenarc-user mailing list
> Cod...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/codenarc-user
>