Hi Allan! 2011/4/4 Alan Wright <alanwright.h...@googlemail.com>: > > The intention behind Lucene++ has always been to closely reflect the java > lucene code with a view to being able to keep up with the pace of development.
As Itamar wrote, I work on this too. One question that came into my mind was, if the process of porting the Java code to C++ is automatized in some way? Or do you port the code manually? If it is done automatically, then in my opinion it would be promising approach to look at the transformation rules. So, that due to these rules the optimal code with respect to performance is generated, instead of optimizing the code by hand afterwards. But just an idea. Don't know yet, if this idea is feasible in practice. > [...] > > Looking forward, there's a new fairly substantial feature release of java > lucene > (3.1) that will require porting. I also look forward to working with you (and > anyone else!) in order to continually improve Lucene++/CLucene performance. In the course of the activity to introduce smart_pointers into CLucene 2.3.2 we discussed about the impact of the smart pointers on the performance. We only had the implemented test cases as benchmark, but I wasn't sure, if they are a good benchmark. So, if we have a good benchmark for Lucene++ would be useful, so that we can see in detail how the changes improves the performance. Kind regards, Veit ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Xperia(TM) PLAY It's a major breakthrough. An authentic gaming smartphone on the nation's most reliable network. And it wants your games. http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-sfdev _______________________________________________ CLucene-developers mailing list CLucene-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/clucene-developers
