--- Nadav Har'El <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan Armbrust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > on 17/02/2006 08:50:53 > PM: ... > So I'm not sure the solution is to change the > semantics of the existing > constructor, but I think Lucene definitely need a > new constructor or > convenience > function that will do "the right thing" for opening > a potentially-existing > index.
Or maybe get away from the vanilla constructor mindset, and add more explicitly named factory methods? Perhaps something like IndexWriter.openOrCreate(), create() and open() (first similar to append methods in streams, second for overwrite, third for opening only if one exists). And internally constructor could take set of arguments(). I mean, this same thing is done for Field(), with somewhat improved construction semantics (although semantics of Field object are bit messy, bundling both field definition and value). -+ Tatu +- __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
