> I didn't understand the point of creating abstract base classes for
> plugins. I am not strictly opposing it or anything, I just don't see
> why it would make things simpler/more flexible. AFAICS, there is not
> much an abstract base class can do but to pass the arguments of
> assignScores to calculateScore/distributeScoreToOutlinks. I mean, here
> is how I envision a ContentBasedScoringFilter class(or a
> DistributingScoringFilter):
>
> abstract class ContentBasedScoringFilter implements ScoringFilter {
> assignScores(args) { return calculateScore(args); }
> protected abstract calculateScore(args);
> }
>
> Or do you have something else in mind?
Yes, something like that. But I also thought that if you don't want to
repeat the logic of traversing through links (with all the logic which
is now in ParseOutputFormat), that logic could be in an abstract class
which would just traverse them and call an abstract function for each one.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Nutch-developers mailing list
Nutch-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nutch-developers
