Github user covolution commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/171#discussion_r110346756
--- Diff: solr/core/src/java/org/apache/solr/handler/StreamHandler.java ---
@@ -191,7 +237,20 @@ public void inform(SolrCore core) {
.withFunctionName("lteq", LessThanEqualToEvaluator.class)
.withFunctionName("not", NotEvaluator.class)
.withFunctionName("or", OrEvaluator.class)
-
+
+ // Date Time Evaluators
+ .withFunctionName(TemporalEvaluatorYear.FUNCTION_NAME,
TemporalEvaluatorYear.class)
--- End diff --
I agree with what you are saying. Its a tricky question.
The function definitions in StreamHandler are all static, there are no
class instances. This makes sense if a factory is creating them. If we went
for an instance method on an implementation class then that wouldn't really
work. (It would allow us to have multiple implementations in the same class
though)!
So instances vs static is a bit of a problem. I like that you can also use
aliases at the moment so wouldn't want to lose that. Are function classes being
created on-demand, per request?
If we keep with the static implementation, perhaps we can use an interface
called FunctionNames to put all the string constants? It would be one central
definition list for StreamHandler, GraphHandler and SolrTable. Function
implementation classes could still reference the FunctionNames in their
implementation.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
