On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 06:35:27PM -0500, Lars Kellogg-Stedman wrote:
> > my $index1 = SWISH::API->new_index( 'index.1' );
> > my $index2 = SWISH::API->new_index( 'index.2' );
> I'd go for SWISH::API::Index->new(), myself.
Yes, that's what we were discussing. But the index structure stores
the swish handle, so currently it can't be an independent object.
> And I'd probably try to do something about New_Search_Object, too
Like what? You mean make it a separate class, too? It's the same
situation in that it needs the swish handle.
> In any case, attached to this message is a diff against 2.4.2 that adds the
> (1) The new() function now takes a perl list:
> $sw = new SWISH::API [ index [, index ] ]
> So you can say:
> $sw = new SWISH::API "index.1";
> $sw = new SWISH::API "index.1", "index.2";
But you can't say $sw = SWISH::API->new( "index.1 index.2" ). That
breaks existing code.
> The above calls will add the indexes and call SwishAttach().
> (2) The new() function can be called with an empty parameter list:
> $sw = new SWISH::API;
> In this case, you get a new handle but no indexes. You can then:
I need to look at the code. I don't see why attach couldn't be called
upon the first call that needs to read the index. And $sw->addindex()
could die if calling after an attach.
Unsubscribe from or help with the swish-e list:
Help with Swish-e:
Received on Tue Nov 30 16:38:42 2004