Hey Koji,
Yeah I've seen that page before. I'd love to see solr-ruby get to that
point!
I wonder if starting from the top down would be a good way to approach this
discussion. Like talking about the public API then talk about the code
underneath to support it, then refactoring etc.. So even before discussing
something request/response "placeholder" classes problem, I'll just express
some of the API things that I've always wanted and/or disliked ;)
* more rich and customizable document model:
documents.each do {|doc| puts d.class==MyCustomDocClass}
* more rich and customizable facet model:
response.facets.each do |facet|
facet.field
facet.hits
end
* set document class type dynamically within result set before iterating:
documents.assign_doc_class do |raw_doc|
return Models::CD if doc[:format_type]=='CD'
return Models::StandardDoc
end
# this would be nice because sometimes we're iterating through a result
set with entirely different "types" of docs.
* document field method accessors
doc.id (or at least doc[:id])
# instead of
doc['id']
* pagination aware result sets (documents and facets)
documents.total_pages # etc.
response.facets.has_next?
* ability to pass in arbitrary query fields directly to solr without
worrying about solr-ruby raising an error
* ability to bypass query field mapping completely while querying
* flatten :facets mapping so that:
:facets=>{:fields=>[]}
# becomes
:facet_fields=>[]
* ability to query a custom :query_type and NOT having to create a custom
request/response class pair
Those things are pretty easy to implement. I'd imagine that if solr-ruby has
a solid API, and a simpler code base it'd also be pretty easy to implement
some of the ORM-like features included on the wiki page and even a more DSL
like approach to regular querying:
response = connectiion.search do |q|
q.per_page 10
q.query 'twain'
q.filter_query :title, 'finn'
q.facet_fields :title, :author
q.query_field :title, 0.5
end
What do you think?
Matt
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Koji Sekiguchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt,
>
> > Do any of you have ideas or things that you've disliked about solr-ruby?
> If
> > so, please say so! I've got all kinds of ideas I'd like to implement and
> > crank out, but for now I want to see what other people are thinking.
>
> I don't have a concrete idea of making it better, but I agree with you.
> Do you have the idea? let's discuss it to be things more rubyish.
>
> see also:
> http://wiki.apache.org/solr/solr-ruby/BrainStorming
>
> Koji
>
>
