On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 7:20 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Benoit, all, > > I'm not too happy with how this turned out. > > There's multiple things this patch is trying to solve and by thinking about > them separately, I think we can come up with a cleaner, more future-proof > design. I'd like to avoid special casing for situations we think are common > but turn out not to be. > > 1. Built-in filters. Much like built in reduce functions, the _doc_Ids filter > could be built-in. This would allow us to add more built-in filter functions > in the future when we discover patterns there.
What d you mean by built-in filter ? How would it be called ? If it's like _count in reduce function it doesn't solve the case i'm trying to solve, ie not creating a function for common case. But I think you mean smth like built_in=... , but am not sure it's needed here since we have only one case on POST. So which usage do you expect ? Any example? - benoît
