lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From markharw00d <markharw...@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject Re: "Advanced" query language
Date Mon, 05 Dec 2005 23:27:10 GMT
Erik's scenario pretty much nails it for me.

I prefer the Ant-like XML approach over a Spring one because all the 
messy classnames are removed from document instances. ( I wasn't 
suggesting we use either technology, merely citing them as object 
assembly languages). Haven't seen HiveMind/Digester - will have to take 
a look.

 >>Because of the variations in how the Query subclass  constructors and 
setters work, there will need to be a little bit of  glue between as 
well, I presume.

Yes, I imagine objects with zero arg constructors and public getters and 
setters are required to represent query requests if the same parser is 
to work with new query types.
Another nice-to-have would be for all the existing Query objects to be 
persistable in the new format. So if I use the existing query parser or 
the existing Java API directly I can always persist and retrieve the 
query, all settings intact. This is like what the current 
Query.toString() tries to do but falls short of because of limitations 
in the existing query syntax.




		
___________________________________________________________ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.
http://uk.security.yahoo.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message