NightOwl888 opened a new issue #407:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/issues/407


   To make adding fields more discoverable via Intellisense, we have already 
created extension methods for "normal" field types 
[here](https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/tree/ae13dc4dfe0b8a2d305b9f8f860ac0849a16ac80/src/Lucene.Net/Support/Document/Extensions).
 However, we still need extension methods for facet field types defined within 
`Lucene.Net.Facet` to make the API consistent.
   
   ## Proposed API
   
   ```c#
   namespace Lucene.Net.Documents.Extensions
   {
       public static class DocumentExtensions // Check to ensure the name 
doesn't collide with that in the Lucene.Net assembly, rename to 
DocumentFacetExtensions if necessary
       {
           public static FacetField AddFacetField(this document, string dim, 
params string[] path);
           public static SortedSetDocValuesFacetField 
AddSortedSetDocValuesFacetField(this document, string dim, string label);
           public static Int32AssociationFacetField 
AddInt32AssociationFacetField(this document, int assoc, string dim, params 
string[] path);
           public static SingleAssociationFacetField 
AddSingleAssociationFacetField(this document, float assoc, string dim, params 
string[] path);
       }
   }
   ```
   
   ## Unit Tests
   
   In addition, there are currently no tests for these extension methods, as 
the tests are using the existing Java API syntax. We should set up some basic 
unit tests to ensure the correct field type is added to a `Document` with the 
correct values and returned from the extension method correctly (both for the 
original extension methods and for the new facet extension methods).
   


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


Reply via email to