Add ?limit= parameter

[nomeata]

This fixes #40.

[nomeata]

This would fix #40, but only in a rather superficial way: The hits are still generated, just not returned to the client. I wonder how useful that is.

I’d suggest we don’t merge this yet, but wait until I had time to refactor the code to pass the parameter through to the backend (or merge backend and frontend). Until then, @oOo0oOo, I suggest that your client passes the limit attribute (it will be ignored for now), but also applies the limit client side. How does that sound?

[oOo0oOo]

Absolutely, I would welcome a proper implementation. There is no urgency on my end, I'll make my changes when this is released.

[grunweg]

Let me just say that I would also like to have this. (To un-#xy, I'd like to audit all definitions which take a certain type as explicit argument. Loogle doesn't allow such fine-grained search at the moment. There are 300-400 definitions mentioning the type, so auditing them all is fine --- but at the moment made impossible through this limit.)

[nomeata]

So your use case is extending the limit, not efficiently reducing it, right?

[grunweg]

Yes - I'd like an opt-in mechanism to look at all results.

[nomeata]

I feel like that's not a good idea on the public service. But maybe on local use it could be fine?

[grunweg]

Right, I can run loogle locally, and it's even in the README. So, being able to lift the limit should do for my purposes, indeed.