lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Maurits van Wijland" <m.vanwijl...@quicknet.nl>
Subject Re: Dutch Stemmer
Date Wed, 10 Oct 2001 22:22:06 GMT
Doug,

I will add comments to the code and reduce the number of public classes.

Maurits.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Cutting" <DCutting@grandcentral.com>
To: <lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 7:37 PM
Subject: RE: Dutch Stemmer


> This looks good.  It is low-risk, since it changes no existing classes,
> adding new classes in a new package.  It looks as though you've
implemented
> the right things (a stemming filter, and an analyzer that plugs this
> together with a stop list and tokenizer).  I don't speak Dutch, so I
cannot
> assess the quality of these.
>
> My concerns before this is checked in are that:
>   1. It compiles.  I have not tested this yet, and we don't want to break
> the build.
>   2. More Javadoc is added.  My rule of thumb is that there should be no
> empty boxes in the generated javadoc, i.e., every publicly visible class,
> method and field must be documented.  Also, every package should have a
> package.html with at least a one-line description of what is in the
package.
>   3. Fewer classes and methods are public.  Do the Rule, RuleVector and
> DutchStemmer classes need to be public?  Probably little more than the
core
> classes (DutchStemFilter DutchAnalyzer) need to be public.
>
> Doug
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Maurits van Wijland [mailto:m.vanwijland@quicknet.nl]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 12:48 AM
> > To: lucene-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> > Cc: joanne.sproston@teamware.co.uk; Doug Cutting
> > Subject: Dutch Stemmer
> >
> >
> > Doug,
> >
> > Here is my first version of the dutch stemmer.
> > Doug could you have a look at this?
> >
> > kind regards,
> >
> > Maurits
> >
> >
> >
>


Mime
View raw message