On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > Marvin Humphrey wrote: >> >> Yeesh, that's evil. :( >> >> It will be sweet, sweet justice if one of your own projects gets infected >> by >> the kind of action-at-a-distance bug you're so blithely unconcerned about > > Heh. Thats a bit over the top. It is evil stuff, but its much less evil in > this very contained instance than the general case. Much less. > > But still a bit evil with the potential to grow. I'm not anymore of a fan of > passing a config to each class though. But I guess from a design point > of view, it does feel a little less evil.
Agree. But passing settings around doesn't solve the problem. Example: New settings may be chosen by an application for an IndexSearcher that's incompatible with a custom older Query/Weight/Scorer. There's really no getting around that problem. I think the static helps solve drop-in compat for a complete working application. Good components should only be checking the static, not setting it. -Yonik http://www.lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
