lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tatu Saloranta <cowtownco...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: 1.9 RC1
Date Sun, 19 Feb 2006 18:41:49 GMT
--- Nadav Har'El <NYH@il.ibm.com> wrote:

> Dan Armbrust <daniel.armbrust.list@gmail.com> wrote
> on 17/02/2006 08:50:53
> PM:
...
> So I'm not sure the solution is to change the
> semantics of the existing
> constructor, but I think Lucene definitely need a
> new constructor or
> convenience
> function that will do "the right thing" for opening
> a potentially-existing
> index.

Or maybe get away from the vanilla constructor
mindset, and add more explicitly named factory
methods? Perhaps something like
IndexWriter.openOrCreate(), create() and open() (first
similar to append methods in streams, second for
overwrite, third for opening only if one exists). And
internally constructor could take set of arguments().

I mean, this same thing is done for Field(), with
somewhat improved construction semantics (although
semantics of Field object are bit messy, bundling both
field definition and value).

-+ Tatu +-



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.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