Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 52917 invoked from network); 2 May 2010 17:33:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 2 May 2010 17:33:00 -0000 Received: (qmail 68921 invoked by uid 500); 2 May 2010 17:32:59 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-dev-archive@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 68856 invoked by uid 500); 2 May 2010 17:32:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 68849 invoked by uid 500); 2 May 2010 17:32:59 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-lucene-java-dev@lucene.apache.org Received: (qmail 68846 invoked by uid 99); 2 May 2010 17:32:59 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 May 2010 17:32:59 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of yseeley@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.48 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.48] (HELO mail-ww0-f48.google.com) (74.125.82.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 May 2010 17:32:51 +0000 Received: by wwb28 with SMTP id 28so1286196wwb.35 for ; Sun, 02 May 2010 10:32:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:reply-to:received :date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=jOgsAWaPmH/HM9OMePBoUizdCSY0ietPwSFS41xm9t0=; b=jGH/qMkhWh7vemj1Zh/rcK01ENfj2X7E67ZE7T+NRGmS959LLoXM4wAJd8RgzrR87p K6CpkjBt9LD/ad9eGJ2/SoTbIfyBG9hqfQjFt6Moo6rkUD20eWjfSXUnMJPJmzTjboav gq2x4qneD3F/SdMkngjVabrBVlhi8lmYl7EAs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; b=OAqYVi1t0aekTl4kDFN9GwQTJiCRhz8zdvw6gwuWPVBEyj3b9wpEYrizWRfMpKviZJ bQSnnhcpzuuByi8gfFdgA0BOSIH0gF0jsUMiqxr8FrKHBsZBzpwwG7t5cH4XcioDb27S Xlw8O5gDS4ORi9ID2MCJDK+NnGj0eguOKtsuE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.160.208 with SMTP id u58mr2593103wek.141.1272821551188; Sun, 02 May 2010 10:32:31 -0700 (PDT) Sender: yseeley@gmail.com Reply-To: yonik@lucidimagination.com Received: by 10.216.22.140 with HTTP; Sun, 2 May 2010 10:32:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 13:32:31 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ad60ecec36412eee Message-ID: Subject: BytesRef comparable From: Yonik Seeley To: java-dev@lucene.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Any objections to making BytesRef comparable? It would make it much easier to use with containers that don't take comparators as parameters. -Yonik Apache Lucene Eurocon 2010 18-21 May 2010 | Prague --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org