On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Timothy Baldridge <[email protected]> wrote:
> To play the devil's advocate here, I'd say that duplicating code is a
> bad idea. Now all changes to the un-reduced view must also be made the
> reduced view.

This is my issue with that solution too. I don't like repeating myself.
The reason my code doesn't know what view it is is because I wrote a layer for 
communicating with CouchDB that's independent of the view being called, in the 
interest of saving myself time in the long run. So, I have an agnostic method 
that I want to query an arbitrary view, with arbitrary start and end keys, and 
give me non-reduced results.

> Secondly, I agree with the OP, it seems odd that CouchDB is so
>"relaxed" when it comes to document structure, but a simple thing like
> silently disregarding an argument will cause it to complain.
I tend to like strict error checking, actually. My gripe really isn't that the 
error checking is strict, but rather that I can't discover how to send a 
well-formed request that doesn't get the error. Rather, I have to send the 
request, see whether I get the error, and send a corrected request if I do. 
That's sloppy.

Best Regards,
Luke

Reply via email to