Refactor IndexFieldCapabilities creation by adding a proper builder object #125219
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…bject Reduce boilerplate associated with creating `IndexFieldCapabilities` instances. Since it's a class with a large number of fields, it makes sense to define a builder object, as that can also help with all the Boolean and null blindness going on. As with `FieldCapabilitiesBuilder`, this is only used in tests, to avoid any potential performance hit in production code.
GalLalouche
added
>refactoring
Team:Search Foundations
|
Pinging @elastic/es-search-foundations (Team:Search Foundations) |
drempapis
approved these changes
Mar 20, 2025
afoucret
pushed a commit
to afoucret/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 21, 2025
…bject (elastic#125219) Reduce boilerplate associated with creating `IndexFieldCapabilities` instances. Since it's a class with a large number of fields, it makes sense to define a builder object, as that can also help with all the Boolean and null blindness going on. As with `FieldCapabilitiesBuilder`, this is only used in tests, to avoid any potential performance hit in production code.
smalyshev
pushed a commit
to smalyshev/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 21, 2025
…bject (elastic#125219) Reduce boilerplate associated with creating `IndexFieldCapabilities` instances. Since it's a class with a large number of fields, it makes sense to define a builder object, as that can also help with all the Boolean and null blindness going on. As with `FieldCapabilitiesBuilder`, this is only used in tests, to avoid any potential performance hit in production code.
omricohenn
pushed a commit
to omricohenn/elasticsearch
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 28, 2025
…bject (elastic#125219) Reduce boilerplate associated with creating `IndexFieldCapabilities` instances. Since it's a class with a large number of fields, it makes sense to define a builder object, as that can also help with all the Boolean and null blindness going on. As with `FieldCapabilitiesBuilder`, this is only used in tests, to avoid any potential performance hit in production code.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A follow up to #121310.
Reduce boilerplate associated with creating
IndexFieldCapabilitiesinstances. Since it's a class with a large number of fields, it makes sense to define a builder object, as that can also help with all the Boolean and null blindness going on. As withFieldCapabilitiesBuilder, this is only used in tests, to avoid any potential performance hit in production code.