[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2308?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13094618#comment-13094618
 ] 

Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-2308:
---------------------------------------

bq. I don't like that the chained setters make such code possible: it's 
unreadable.

Even as one-line its much better readable than anything else. Did you try to 
create a WordDelimiterFilter using it 15 argument ctor? Two minutes later you 
dont know anymore whet the 3rd boolean is about.

The chained calls can be read left to right and you can do that very fast. The 
syntax shown above is just extra sugar, but the one line variant is perfectly 
readable. OK, not for people still using two whitespaces after the 
end-of-sentence-period ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_spacing]) :-)

> Separately specify a field's type
> ---------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-2308
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2308
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core/index
>            Reporter: Michael McCandless
>            Assignee: Michael McCandless
>              Labels: gsoc2011, lucene-gsoc-11, mentor
>             Fix For: 4.0
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-2308-10.patch, LUCENE-2308-11.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308-12.patch, LUCENE-2308-13.patch, LUCENE-2308-14.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308-15.patch, LUCENE-2308-16.patch, LUCENE-2308-17.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308-18.patch, LUCENE-2308-19.patch, LUCENE-2308-2.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308-20.patch, LUCENE-2308-21.patch, LUCENE-2308-3.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308-4.patch, LUCENE-2308-5.patch, LUCENE-2308-6.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308-7.patch, LUCENE-2308-8.patch, LUCENE-2308-9.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308-branch.patch, LUCENE-2308-final.patch, LUCENE-2308-ltc.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308-merge-1.patch, LUCENE-2308-merge-2.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308-merge-3.patch, LUCENE-2308.branchdiffs, 
> LUCENE-2308.branchdiffs.moved, LUCENE-2308.patch, LUCENE-2308.patch, 
> LUCENE-2308.patch, LUCENE-2308.patch, LUCENE-2308.patch
>
>
> This came up from dicussions on IRC.  I'm summarizing here...
> Today when you make a Field to add to a document you can set things
> index or not, stored or not, analyzed or not, details like omitTfAP,
> omitNorms, index term vectors (separately controlling
> offsets/positions), etc.
> I think we should factor these out into a new class (FieldType?).
> Then you could re-use this FieldType instance across multiple fields.
> The Field instance would still hold the actual value.
> We could then do per-field analyzers by adding a setAnalyzer on the
> FieldType, instead of the separate PerFieldAnalzyerWrapper (likewise
> for per-field codecs (with flex), where we now have
> PerFieldCodecWrapper).
> This would NOT be a schema!  It's just refactoring what we already
> specify today.  EG it's not serialized into the index.
> This has been discussed before, and I know Michael Busch opened a more
> ambitious (I think?) issue.  I think this is a good first baby step.  We could
> consider a hierarchy of FIeldType (NumericFieldType, etc.) but maybe hold
> off on that for starters...

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to