Mailing-List: contact dev-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 03:44:57 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Mike Sokolov (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
Message-ID: 
 <304276222.47827.1336621497739.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <221525027.37192.1336442628527.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
Subject: [jira] [Issue Comment Edited] (LUCENE-4040) Improve QueryParser and
 supported syntax documentation
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4040?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13272061#comment-13272061 ] 

Mike Sokolov edited comment on LUCENE-4040 at 5/10/12 3:44 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------

I attached a small documentation patch for the surround parser.  It isn't comprehensive, but gives a brief summary of all the operators as far as I understand them.
                
      was (Author: sokolov):
    small document patch for surround parser
                  
> Improve QueryParser and supported syntax documentation
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-4040
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4040
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: modules/queryparser
>            Reporter: Chris Male
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: LUCENE-4040.patch
>
>
> In LUCENE-4024 there were some changes to the fuzzy query syntax.  Only the Classic QueryParser really documents its syntax, which makes it hard to know whether the changes effected other QPs.  Compounding this issue there are many classes which have no javadocs at all and I found myself quite confused when I consolidated all the QPs into their module.
> We should do a concerted effort to improve the documentation so that it is clear what syntax is supported by what QPs and so that at least the user facing classes have javadocs.  
> As part of this, I wonder whether we should give the syntax supported by the Classic QueryParser a new name (rather than just Lucene's query syntax) since other QPs can and do support other syntax, and then somehow add some typed control over this, so QPs have to declare programmatically that they support the syntax and so we can verify that by randomly plugging in implementations into tests.

--
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