On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Chris Hostetter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: I truly believe SolrPluginUtils.parseFieldBoosts(foo)) is the straight
: foward way to call a static method in SolrPluginUtils, extending the
like i said: submit a patch and i'll commit it ... i don't mind changing
patch attached
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ्
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Chris Hostetter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: I truly believe SolrPluginUtils.parseFieldBoosts(foo)) is the straight
: foward way to call a static method in
: I truly believe SolrPluginUtils.parseFieldBoosts(foo)) is the straight
: foward way to call a static method in SolrPluginUtils, extending the
like i said: submit a patch and i'll commit it ... i don't mind changing
it to the full class name, i just dont' wnat to use a static import.
-Hoss
I truly believe SolrPluginUtils.parseFieldBoosts(foo)) is the straight
foward way to call a static method in SolrPluginUtils, extending the
class and invoking a static method does not make it obvious . static
members belong to the class where it is declared .
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 4:10 AM,
: This kind of usage is uncommon anywhere. Maybe ,static import pollutes
I don't know about anywhere ... if nothing else you can see it right
here in Solr :)
It's essentially the same thing as import aliasing or type aliasing as
has been proposed many times by many people ... and according to
This kind of usage is uncommon anywhere. Maybe ,static import pollutes
the namesapce, but users are more used to this (because the language
recommends this). The reason for introducing static import was to
avoid this kind of clever tricks. If you are using any modern IDE , it
tells you whether is
: instead of using
:
: import static org.apache.solr.util.SolrPluginUtils.*;
:
: there is an inner class as follows
that was intentional ... i'm not a fan of import static in cases like this
(Utility classes with *lots* of static methods). it pollutes the
namespace of the current class and
