[Mulgara-dev] New "commit" developer

[Paul Gearon]

On Mar 3, 2007, at 12:41 AM, Andrae Muys wrote:
> This does remind me though that when I looked at the  
> PrefixResolver, and given your questions earlier, I am convinced  
> that the ResolverSPI doesn't provide sufficient guidance to  
> resolver developers.  I have a few ideas, but basically I think  
> that it was a mistake to allow resolver-writers to try implementing  
> their own resolve() method - or at least to require them to.  A  
> _correct_ resolve() method is really very minimal - it checks to  
> see if it might become possible to resolve the constraint, if not  
> it returns 'Empty', if there exists an interpretation of the  
> constraint that is resolvable then it returns an appropriate  
> 'Resolution'.
>
> The reason I am thinking that the resolver SPI itself is to blame  
> is that people (including myself), keep wanting to do too much in  
> the resolve() method - PrefixResolver.resolve() is a classic  
> example of this - rather than deferring to *Resolution::<init>() or  
> *Resolution::beforeFirst().

Yes, I wrote the prefix resolver.  I basically raided another  
resolver and modified for my own purposes, so it structured just like  
another resolver in there somewhere.  I forget which one, but I do  
recall that DavidM wrote it.  :-)  The Node Type resolver development  
was a carbon copy of this process.

Paul