I am working on a project, and am currently working on implementing some logging with log4j and I was curious about how I should go about implementing the logs. The two implementations I am kicking around are as follows:
First Option
Use single log from super class for that class and all sub classes:
public abstract class AbstractFoo {
protected static Log LOG = LogFactory.getLog(AbstractFoo.class);
...
}
public class Foo extends AbstractFoo {
public void someMethod() {
LOG.info("Using abstract log");
}
}
Second Option
Use individual logs for each class, super and subs:
public abstract class AbstractFoo {
private static Log LOG = LogFactory.getLog(AbstractFoo.class);
...
}
public class Foo extends AbstractFoo {
private static Log LOG = LogFactory.getLog(Foo.class);
public void someMethod() {
LOG.info("Using own log");
}
}
What makes more sense and why?
I wouldn't do either. Instead I would make it use the correct class in both cases.
public abstract class AbstractFoo {
protected final Log log = LogFactory.getLog(getClass());
...
}
public class Foo extends AbstractFoo {
public void someMethod() {
log.info("Using abstract log");
}
}
If you are not doing lots of logging (which is a good idea anyway) you can use a method instead.
public abstract class AbstractFoo {
protected Log log() { return LogFactory.getLog(getClass()); }
...
}
If there is a class which calls this a lot you can override it to give you a cached instance.