[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13057595#comment-13057595
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-3259:
-------------------------------------
{quote}
If D&PEnum says getPayload() returns null if there is no payload, then why do
you say it's not defined? I don't mind if we change the contract to
hasPayload() first, then getPayload().
{quote}
Let me rephrase what I mean: currently if you call getPayload(), and there is
no payload, it does not actually always return null :) So its "defined" but
does not work as defined.
The only safe thing at the moment to do if you are not sure if there is a
payload, is to check hasPayload() first, and if this returns false, do not mess
with getPayload().
If you are sure there is a payload, you don't need to do anything with
hasPayload().
> need to clarify/change D&Penum api for hasPayload/getPayload
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-3259
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3259
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> We encountered this bug while integrating the faceting module:
> * D&PEnum says getPayload() will return null if there is no payload.
> * however, in some cases this is not what happens.
> * things do work (with no exceptions), if you always check hasPayload() first.
> The easiest fix could be to correct the javadocs, and say that you should
> always check hasPayload() first... otherwise getPayload() is not defined.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
