: If class Explanation would have a boolean attribute indicating whether
: or not there was a match, the Explanation for BooleanQuery could
: simply use this value from the Explanation of the prohibited clause.
I've definitely thought about that a lot initially. But my gut reaction
was to try and fix the broken explain methods using the current
limitations of the Explanation class to reduce the size of the patch.
Unfortunately there are still some cases that can't be solved without that
information, ie...
"w1 w2^0.0" (testBQ12 from the bug)
"+w1^0.0 w2" (testBQ18 from the bug)
In the first case, documents which match both terms get their score
divided in half because the the explain method can't tell the score of 0.0
is becuase of the boost, so the coord factor gets applied by mistake.
In the second case, the explain method assumes a total failure even
if a document matches both terms because it got a 0.0 score from a
required clause.
Other then the (somewhat obscure) cases where a clause has a boost of 0.0,
I managed to fix all of the BooleanQuery explain bugs by normalizing all
clauses (even if they are prohibited) and fixing some poor assumptions in
the explain method itself.
I'm going to set BooleanQuery aside for a little bit and focus on some of
the other query classes, but here's what i had in mind for changing the
Explanation class, if anyone sees any problems please let me know...
1) Add the following to Explanation...
Boolean match = null;
public void setMatch(boolean b) { match = new Boolean(b); }
public Boolean getMatch() { return match; }
public boolean isMatch() {
return (null != match) ? match.booleanValue() : (0.0f < getValue());
}
2) change Explanation.toString and toHtml to have something along the
lines of ...
if (null != match)
buffer.append("Definite "+(match.booleanValue()?"":"NON-")+"match");
else
buffer.append("Assuming Match");
3) change all explain implimentations in lucene core to call setMatch when
they call setValue.
4) change BooleanWeight.explain to call isMatch on the sub-explanations
when testing prohibited/required clauses.
4) change all of my Explanation tests to call isMatch.
...this would be backwards compatible for any non-core Query classes out
there, and (as far as i can figure) be no worse then the current behavior
of testing an explanation.getValue() == 0.0f 9since that's the fallback
inside of isMatch())
thoughts?
-Hoss
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
