lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Michael McCandless (Commented) (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-2000) Use covariant clone() return types
Date Thu, 29 Mar 2012 17:40:28 GMT


Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-2000:

Thanks Ryan!
> Use covariant clone() return types
> ----------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-2000
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: core/other
>    Affects Versions: 3.0
>            Reporter: Uwe Schindler
>            Assignee: Ryan McKinley
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 4.0
>         Attachments: LUCENE-2000-clone_covariance.patch, LUCENE-2000-clone_covariance.patch
> *Paul Cowan wrote in LUCENE-1257:*
> OK, thought I'd jump in and help out here with one of my Java 5 favourites. Haven't seen
anyone discuss this, and don't believe any of the patches address this, so thought I'd throw
a patch out there (against SVN HEAD @ revision 827821) which uses Java 5 covariant return
types for (almost) all of the Object#clone() implementations in core. 
> i.e. this:
> public Object clone() {
> changes to:
> public SpanNotQuery clone() {
> which lets us get rid of a whole bunch of now-unnecessary casts, so e.g.
> if (clone == null) clone = (SpanNotQuery) this.clone();
> becomes
> if (clone == null) clone = this.clone();
> Almost everything has been done and all downcasts removed, in core, with the exception
> Some SpanQuery stuff, where it's assumed that it's safe to cast the clone() of a SpanQuery
to a SpanQuery - this can't be made covariant without declaring "abstract SpanQuery clone()"
in SpanQuery itself, which breaks those SpanQuerys that don't declare their own clone() 
> Some IndexReaders, e.g. DirectoryReader - we can't be more specific than changing .clone()
to return IndexReader, because it returns the result of IndexReader.clone(boolean). We could
use covariant types for THAT, which would work fine, but that didn't follow the pattern of
the others so that could be a later commit. 
> Two changes were also made in contrib/, where not making the changes would have broken
code by trying to widen IndexInput#clone() back out to returning Object, which is not permitted.
contrib/ was otherwise left untouched.
> Let me know what you think, or if you have any other questions.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see:


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message