rclabo commented on issue #485:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/issues/485#issuecomment-833494556


   I agree with @NightOwl888  wholeheartedly. It's nearly impossible to fully 
express how important it is to have Lucene.NET stick as close as possible to 
Java Lucene.  There is very little code on this planet that has been as battle 
hardened as the code in Java Lucene.  When you consider that it’s the 
foundation that both Solr and ElasticSearch are built on and then think about 
the size of the installed base of those products, it’s mindboggling how much of 
the planet runs and depends on Java Lucene.  That level of attention and use 
over two decades leads to an amazingly solid code base. A hard won result that 
is not something to be taken lightly or easily achieved by others.
   
   The fact that Java Lucene’s code is so battle hardened is an enormous asset 
when you stop and consider the size of the code base and factor in that it 
supports multi threaded concurrent use. Not to mention the fact that many of 
the concepts implemented in Lucene are indeed state of the art and non-trivial 
to understand.  Taken together a senior developer would need to work with this 
codebase for 5 – 10 _years_ to come anywhere close to fully comprehending it. 
And without that level of knowledge, any significant changes or deviations from 
Java Lucene are likely to result in bugs that could be very difficult to track 
down.
   
   I believe that it's absolutely vital that Lucene.NET stay true to its goal 
of being a line by line port other than minor API changes to adhere to .Net 
naming conventions and such where applicable.  Even now there are parts of 
Lucene.NET that I wish tracked closer to the Java code.  In some cases that’s 
just not possible because of the differences in the platform tools but our goal 
non the less should be to port Lucene.NET from Java Lucene as faithfully as 
possible. 
   


-- 
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