[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5952?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14136863#comment-14136863
 ] 

Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-5952:
---------------------------------------

bq. Uwe Schindler 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 "!".

I don't veto that change, I am just unhappy. Its hard to read, thats all, and 
is not the intention of the API developer. I have no problem with commiting it, 
but be prepared to have it changed the next I time I have to somehow touch that 
code! :-)

Negating a simple method call should always be done with "!", especially if the 
method name is something that reads "fluent", Ryan's argument is not an issue 
(in my opinion - if it is an issue, define a method:
{code:java}
Utils.not(boolean b) { return !b; }
{code}

I agree, for stuff like {{if (!(a instanceof b))}}, I tend to invert the logic 
instead.

> 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]

Reply via email to