[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3738?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13244743#comment-13244743 ] 

Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-3738:
---------------------------------------

Part of the optimization is already committed to 3.x since 4 days, this is just another round of optimization. :-)
                
> Be consistent about negative vInt/vLong
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-3738
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3738
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Assignee: Uwe Schindler
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 3.6, 4.0
>
>         Attachments: ByteArrayDataInput.java.patch, LUCENE-3738-improvement.patch, LUCENE-3738.patch, LUCENE-3738.patch, LUCENE-3738.patch, LUCENE-3738.patch, LUCENE-3738.patch
>
>
> Today, write/readVInt "allows" a negative int, in that it will encode and decode correctly, just horribly inefficiently (5 bytes).
> However, read/writeVLong fails (trips an assert).
> I'd prefer that both vInt/vLong trip an assert if you ever try to write a negative number... it's badly trappy today.  But, unfortunately, we sometimes rely on this... had we had this assert in 'since the beginning' we could have avoided that.
> So, if we can't add that assert in today, I think we should at least fix readVLong to handle negative longs... but then you quietly spend 9 bytes (even more trappy!).

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org