[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5952?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14136208#comment-14136208
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-5952:
--------------------------------------------
In general I agree that positive logic should go first but I think in
this case it makes the code worse: it would add 2 levels of nesting,
with the else (to throw the exceptions) way at the end of the method.
[~thetaphi] do you feel so strongly about this code styling that it will
cause you to otherwise veto this change? If so I will switch to
{{!}}.
And are there any technical (not just code styling) feedback on the
last patch? I'd like to commit this soon: it is blocking 4.10.1.
> Give Version parsing exceptions more descriptive error messages
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5952
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5952
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 4.10
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 4.10.1, 4.11, 5.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-5952.patch, LUCENE-5952.patch, LUCENE-5952.patch,
> LUCENE-5952.patch
>
>
> As discussed on the dev list, it's spooky how Version.java tries to fully
> parse the incoming version string ... and then throw exceptions that lack
> details about what invalid value it received, which file contained the
> invalid value, etc.
> It also seems too low level to be checking versions (e.g. is not future proof
> for when 4.10 is passed a 5.x index by accident), and seems redundant with
> the codec headers we already have for checking versions?
> Should we just go back to lenient parsing?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
