[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-657?page=comments#action_12443952 ] Steven Parkes commented on LUCENE-657: --------------------------------------
Good point on the members. There are public getter methods and the member are set from ctor, so the only reason for making them protected is to allow them to be set outside the ctor, right? Is that really necessary, to change them after construction? I have a tendency to prefer protected setters over protected fields, but there is precedence for this, e.g, BooleanQuery.minNrShouldMatch, so I don't think that part is exceptional. > FuzzyQuery should not be final > ------------------------------ > > Key: LUCENE-657 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-657 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Search > Environment: all platforms > Reporter: Andreas Neumann > Assigned To: Steven Parkes > Priority: Trivial > Fix For: 2.1 > > Attachments: fuzzy.patch > > > I am trying to extend the FuzzyQuery to further filter the TermEnum. (I am > indexing stem forms and original forms, but I only want to match original > forms with a fuzzy term, otherwise I get to much noise). However, FuzzyQuery > is a final class and I cannot extend it. > As discussed in the mailing list > (http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/lucene/java-dev/38756), we want to > make the private variables and inner classes protected. > I am attaching a patch for FuzzyQuery.java that implements this. I ran all > unit tests and they passed without errors. > Andreas. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - 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]
