On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Ryan McKinley <ryan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> And I'm still on the fence - _explain_ alone does not justify a whole
>> new syntax IMO... so we may need more usecase examples to figure out
>> what problem we're actually trying to solve.
>>
>
> The key use case I am thinking of is an easy way to add a value to the
> the response. In SQL:
>
> SELECT name,'hello' FROM ...
>
> With this syntax you can now use:
>
> fl=name,_value:hello_
>
> The existing syntax is totally ridiculous:
>
> fl=name,{!transformer name=value value=hello}
That's not the existing syntax. Or I guess you were just
brainstorming about what using the existing localParams syntax would
look like if you tried to apply it to transformers?
Or are you saying that localParams syntax is ridiculous and should be
replaced by something different?
> I see a real need to be able to pass a simple value to a transformer.
> Explain is just one of many examples.
I was trying to think up what other real use cases actually where...
because that really does have a bearing on if a new syntax should be
developed, and what that syntax should look like.
-Yonik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
