Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Verbosity Replacement: Encoder.java #150

Closed
cogmission opened this issue Jan 18, 2015 · 5 comments · Fixed by #174
Closed

Verbosity Replacement: Encoder.java #150

cogmission opened this issue Jan 18, 2015 · 5 comments · Fixed by #174

Comments

@cogmission
Copy link
Collaborator

The Encoder class would benefit from the substitution of the "Verbosity" setting with an actual logging framework. Let's use Logback found here: http://logback.qos.ch/download.html as the actual logging framework. As a result, the log back jar(s) will need to be added to the build.gradle file and the pom.xml file.

For more information, please refer to the this information: https://gist.github.com/cogmission/bcc0b54aaf39b6b0108d

@cogmission cogmission changed the title Verbosity Replacement: TemporalMemory Verbosity Replacement: Encoder.java Jan 18, 2015
@connollyst
Copy link
Contributor

Hey David, is there a reason to use Logback rather than SLF4J? I feel the latter would keep end users' options more open.

@cogmission
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Isn't that the implementation of the Logging API you yourself suggested? :)

@connollyst
Copy link
Contributor

For sure, but in the code itself we wouldn't use any logging implementation. Instead we would just code to the interface/facade, which feels the same but isn't backed by any real logging.

When someone builds an application on htm.java they don't get any logging from us unless they have a logging mechanism in place themselves (like Logback or Log4J). When they drop one in, then they get logging from us - and configure the level.

So for this ticket, we wouldn't need/want Logback.

If we provide examples or want logging in our tests, we can add Logback there.

All that said.. I'm the new guy! lol
I'm in no position to make decisions, just suggestions =)

@cogmission
Copy link
Collaborator Author

So in other words, because the tests ARE downstream
clients/implementations, we DO in fact need the Logback library?

We need to consider the whole distribution, not only the specific issue
regarding this, so the entire solution would have to include both the SLF4J
libs and the Logback libs - I believe this is correct?

On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Sean Connolly notifications@github.com
wrote:

For sure, but in the code itself we wouldn't use any logging
implementation. Instead we would just code to the interface/facade,
which feels the same
https://github.com/connollyst/htm.java/blob/logging/src/main/java/org/numenta/nupic/encoders/RandomDistributedScalarEncoder.java#L376
but isn't backed by any real logging.

When someone builds an application on htm.java they don't get any logging
from us unless they have a logging mechanism in place themselves (like
Logback or Log4J). When they drop one in, then they get logging from us -
and configure the level.

So for this ticket, we wouldn't need/want Logback.

If we provide examples or want logging in our tests, we can add Logback
there.

All that said.. I'm the new guy! lol
I'm in no position to make decisions, just suggestions =)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#150 (comment).

We find it hard to hear what another is saying because of how loudly "who
one is", speaks...

@connollyst
Copy link
Contributor

Continued in #154

connollyst added a commit to connollyst/htm.java that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2015
connollyst added a commit to connollyst/htm.java that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2015
chessweb01 pushed a commit to chessweb01/htm.java that referenced this issue May 12, 2015
chessweb01 pushed a commit to chessweb01/htm.java that referenced this issue May 12, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants