lucene-solr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noble Paul നോബിള്‍ नोब्ळ् <noble.p...@corp.aol.com>
Subject Re: Param Naming and Abbreviations
Date Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:50:10 GMT
+1 for names in its actual form as long as it is not very long. In
config it is nice to see long names becaase it enhances readability.
But ,for request params, short ones are better because that price is
paid by each request. imagine 'facetQuery' instead of 'fq' or fields
instead of 'fl'



On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Grant Ingersoll<gsingers@apache.org> wrote:
> OK, color me confused about how naming should be done for params.  There
> clearly seems to be two camps in Solr-land:  1. those who abbreviate params
> and 2. those who don't.  Pick your sides, please!  ;-)
>
> On SOLR-284 and SOLR-769, I had "long" names and Yonik changed them to be
> shorter ("uprefix", anyone?  Bueller?  Yeah, it means unknown prefix).  On
> SOLR-1237, the general feedback is that evt should be event and that
> newSrchr should be newSearcher or new_searcher or something like that.  The
> SpellCheckComp. tends to be verbose, while faceting tends to be succinct.
>
> Thus, I'd like to suggest we layout some conventions for naming, as I
> personally am confused.   Once we do this, we can wiki it up and then have
> something to refer others too.
>
>
> -Grnt  Ingrsll (aka Grant Ingersoll)
>



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------
Noble Paul | Principal Engineer| AOL | http://aol.com

Mime
View raw message