On Jun 15, 2006, at 10:18 AM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
On 6/15/06, Erik Hatcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Having a way to hook into the response writing by leveraging the ever
improving Solr codebase and its utilities rather than copy/pasting
would be a nice way to aim, I think.
It's a double edged sword. Making more things public facilitates
reuse, but constrains implementation and code evolution. XMLWriter
started out as implementation, not interface.
Those routines in XMLWriter are handy though, and are generally
useful. Under the covers they could still evolve. I'm not proposing
that we open up the internals of XMLWriter, just merely making it
usable externally.
For things like this, I'm OK with making it public if people are OK
with updating their code if the class changes in the future. It's
seems like "expert" level usage as very few people will be writing
their own custom response writers.
I'm not so sure about few people writing custom response writers.
Its currently the best place to put in highlighting, and its also the
best place for me to add in additional document data such as "more
like this" and other related data (based on relationships to other
documents). And I also plan on exploring how some non-XML formats
perform with a Ruby on Rails front-end, though in this case XMLWriter
won't be of any use :)
Also, there are some parts of XMLWriter (writeDate for instance) that
we might want to move to the utils package since it would help the
Java client.
Good point.
Personally I'm more than happy to adjust my projects code when Solr
evolves. I just did this the other day from my use of BitSet to
OpenBitSet - it was not a big deal at all and very likely increased
performance as well. :)
Erik
