incubator-couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wojciech Kaczmarek <kaczmare...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: The sum function (used in reduce)
Date Sat, 25 Apr 2009 18:58:47 GMT
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 20:15, Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Chris Anderson <jchris@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Wojciech Kaczmarek
>> <kaczmarek.w@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Now I see similar questions emerged. So my point is now: Is there a
>>> way, existing or planned, to share some functions between views
>>> without using couchapp macros?
>>
>> No such plans. The functions are stored according to a hash of their
>> byte representation, so it's important that the function doesn't load
>> any additional code, changing its behavior without changing its
>> byte-string. Hence the use-case for something like CouchApp.
>
> The reason for the hashing is that we need to know when the function
> changes to know when to reindex documents. Storing library code
> somewhere ends up making this a bit more complicated. I wouldn't call
> it out of the question to have something, but I don't think its on
> anyone's agenda as things like CouchApp alleviate most of the need for
> it.

I see. This is quite clever hack. I like its simplicity (Couchdb
shines this way in other aspects as well, so kudos to all implementors
:-).
So the result of CouchApp push are just injected code chunks, right?
What about code size for really complicated macro sets, is it
irrelevant in practice?

Mime
View raw message