lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <DCutt...@grandcentral.com>
Subject RE: Dutch Stemmer
Date Wed, 10 Oct 2001 17:37:49 GMT
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