DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22498>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22498
[PATCH] Bugs in configuration-handling in LuceneIndexTransformer
conal.tuohy@vuw.ac.nz changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
------- Additional Comments From conal.tuohy@vuw.ac.nz 2003-08-19 04:00 -------
Thanks Joerg
The null test is indeed useless. I didn't write this bit, but looking at the
code it seems the atts variable will always point to an AttributesImpl object,
since a new AttributesImpl is created when this IndexHelperField is created and
pushed onto the stack. So I simply removed the test. The fact that the code has
always worked and never given an NPE is also good evidence of this. :-)
I asked Vadim just yesterday about the odd comment "we don't need all this
stuff" and he didn't remember ... I think it may refer to the fact that these
parameters are optional, since the same parameters can be supplied at config-
time, or in the input document, or not at all. So the Parameters passed to the
setup() method may be empty. I removed the comment and added some more comments
to the javadoc comment for the method.
In summary: slightly tidier now, but no functional changes.
Con
|