lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jack Krupansky (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LUCENE-4369) StringFields name is unintuitive and not helpful
Date Tue, 11 Sep 2012 13:19:08 GMT


Jack Krupansky commented on LUCENE-4369:

I would suggest "RawTextField". Or, "ExactTextField". Or, "UnanalyzedTextField". I mean, text
is text to an average user. Generally, people should use TextField for text, but use StringField
when they need the "exact", "raw" text "as is" and without being tokenized or otherwise changed.

"KeywordTokenizer" is confusing since it really is "NoTokenizer" or "ExactTextTokenizer" or

Is there currently a wiki page that describes the distinction between "match" and "search"?
I would not expect an average user to know the distinction.

> StringFields name is unintuitive and not helpful
> ------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-4369
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Robert Muir
>         Attachments: LUCENE-4369.patch
> There's a huge difference between TextField and StringField, StringField screws up scoring
and bypasses your Analyzer.
> (see java-user thread "Custom Analyzer Not Called When Indexing" as an example.)
> The name we use here is vital, otherwise people will get bad results.
> I think we should rename StringField to MatchOnlyField.

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

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

View raw message