3 ms·
It's worse than that. When Java finally added a logging library, they added one that no-one had ever heard of before, and which had fundamental flaws. That's
by tomohawk 5y ago
It's worse than that.
When Java finally added a logging library, they added one that no-one had ever heard of before, and which had fundamental flaws. That's why no-one uses it. At the time, log4j existed and was in wide use, but was not represented on the committee.
The author of log4j eventually decided to go a different way and created slf4j / logback. This offering is compatible with log4j and considerably simpler in many ways.
Having not been in the Java world for many years, I was surprised log4j was still in widespread use. But maybe I shouldn't be surprised - whenever we have to interact with Java teams, we always have to tamp down on the tendency towards complexity.
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago> Having not been in the Java world for many years, I was surprised log4j was still in widespread use. It's Java; the ecosystem is, politely, rather conservative and slow moving.
- ashtonkem 5y agoIt's a bit of conservative culture, and a bit the result of success. There is a lot of Java code out there, and a lot of it is quite old. Finding and replacing every single instance of log4j out there would be a lot of work, and before this incident of relatively low benefit to everyone involved.