Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of julian.reschke@gmx.de
 designates 213.165.64.23 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4E92F0CA.2000101@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:19:06 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
CC: Dave Brosius <dbrosius@apache.org>
Subject: Re: CompareTo code seems odd, ok?
References: <4E8FC7F3.2050804@apache.org> <4E900052.5070507@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <4E900052.5070507@gmx.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 2011-10-08 09:48, Julian Reschke wrote:
> On 2011-10-08 05:48, Dave Brosius wrote:
>> This comparator seems odd to me, as it never returns (d) but perhaps i'm
>> confused, is it ok?
>>
>> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.query.lucene.sort.ValueComparableWrapper
>>
>> public int compareTo(ValueComparableWrapper o) {
>> final int d = compare(v, o.getValue());
>> if (d != 0) {
>> if (reversed) {
>> return -d;
>> }
>> return -d;
>> }
>> return 0;
>> }
>
> It certainly looks broken. (If it's intended it would need a comment
> explaining why it is so)
>
> Do we need a test before fixing?
>
> Best regards, Julian

 From a quick test it seems that this code is never exercised from the 
unit tests. The call hierarchy indicates that this should be used from 
SQL2...

Does anybody recall what's going on here? It would be good to have a 
test before touching this...

Best regards, Julian