Hi - I'm not sure what you mean by a reflection based approach, but I've been thinking about doing this for a bit, since we needed it, too.
I'd just thought about listing class names in the config file. The functions would probably need to extend a subclass of ValueSource which will handle argument parsing for the function, so you won't need to hard code the parsing in a VSParser subclass. I think this might simplify the existing code a bit. You might have to do a bit of reflection to instantiate the function. Did you have an alternate approach in mind? Are there any other things this would need to do? Is anyone else working on this? Tom On 9/18/07, Jon Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I see Yonik recently opened an issue in JIRA to track the addition of > pluggable functions (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-356). > Any chance this will be implemented soon? It would save users like me > from having to hack the Solr source or write custom request handlers > for trivial additions (e.g., adding a distance function), not to > mention changes to downstream dependencies (e.g., solr-ruby). Perhaps > a reflection-based approach would do the trick? > > - Jon >
