lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Grant Ingersoll (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Created] (LUCENE-4240) Analyzer.getOffsetGap Improvements
Date Fri, 20 Jul 2012 14:06:46 GMT
Grant Ingersoll created LUCENE-4240:
---------------------------------------

             Summary: Analyzer.getOffsetGap Improvements
                 Key: LUCENE-4240
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4240
             Project: Lucene - Java
          Issue Type: Improvement
            Reporter: Grant Ingersoll


>From LUCENE-3151 (Robert Muir's comments): there is no need for the Analyzer to take in
an IndexableField object.  We can simplify this API:
{quote}
Hey Grant: I know it sounds silly but can we split out the getOffsetGap API change into a
separate issue?
This would be nice to fix ASAP.

I dont understand why it takes IndexableField or took Fieldable. All the other methods here
like
getPositionIncrementGap take "String fieldName". I think this one should too.

I dont think it needs a boolean for tokenized either: returning a 0 for NOT_ANALYZED fields.

If you choose NOT_ANALYZED, that should mean the Analyzer is not invoked!

If you want to do expert stuff control the offset gaps between values for NOT_ANALYZED fields,

then just analyze it instead, with keyword tokenizer!
{quote}

--
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


Mime
View raw message