Mailing-List: contact java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of markrmiller@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.92.27 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
         :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        b=xIffDAL7DVDiY3BWMgvpO99+np4IQWgbVPOOGIfZdsqr3M1s5PV+vg81Lzb66oy7Tj
         o17+mjZLRc4iiN5mw/622rvWnXIFp9zo/OMryobCk7X+UlK4QFzsZJiXccT0GDcVY0oK
         WauzjD6giP3BHOxdzY9o7XCdSBshq5vpZwOWQ=
Message-ID: <4AC7FAD5.7030103@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 21:31:01 -0400
From: Mark Miller <markrmiller@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Lucene 2.9 and deprecated IR.open() methods
References: <C43B8A7D81E54A9E81AAD411C141E4DB@VEGA>
 <4AC684B7.2040505@gmail.com>
 	<59b3eb370910021625r3854c09dw3c280143aed87b1a@mail.gmail.com>
 	<A25B297E93DD444EB37D8EAC118E6B48@VEGA>
 <59b3eb370910021645l154f1ee9p14586927b93fbbef@mail.gmail.com>
 	<9ac0c6aa0910021715w6c67c26fwcd5b25d80d7b7217@mail.gmail.com>
 	<4AC698E4.1050606@gmail.com>
 <59b3eb370910021918h797027e8qf30761dd22e8f6e5@mail.gmail.com>
 	<4AC7E7D0.8060408@gmail.com>
 <c7d45fc70910031826o2822e143i28ad541ab2a31ca5@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c7d45fc70910031826o2822e143i28ad541ab2a31ca5@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ted Dunning wrote:
>
> The builder pattern and the config argument to a factory both have the
> advantage that you can limit changes after creating an object.  Some
> things are just bad to change in mid-stream.  The config argument is
> nice in that you can pass it around to different stake holders, but
> the builder can be used a bit like that as well.
Yeah that argument has been made. But I've *never* seen it as an issue.
Just seems like a solution looking for a problem. I can see how it's
cleaner, not missing that point. But still doesn't make me like it much.

>
> One way to look at it is that a builder is just a config object that
> happens to have the create method.
>
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Michael Busch <buschmic@gmail.com
> <mailto:buschmic@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     But, like Mark said, maybe this is just my personal preference and
>     for others not compelling arguments. Or maybe I'm missing some
>     other advantage of the builder pattern? I haven't used/implemented
>     it myself very much yet...
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Ted Dunning, CTO
> DeepDyve
>


-- 
- Mark

http://www.lucidimagination.com


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