[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12522030
]
Hoss Man commented on LUCENE-584:
---------------------------------
I, unfortunately, haven't had the time to read through everything in the latest
patches, but catching up on my jira mail one of Paul's comments jumped out at
me, so i wanted to make sure it's completley clear: this latest set of patches
completely breaks backwards compatibility for any clients who have Filter
subclasses, or methods that take a Filter as a param, since the Filter class
now has an abstract getMatcher method and no longer supports an abstract BitSet
method -- presumably the expectation being that all client code should have a
search/replace done from Filter=>BitSetFilter
which begs the question: why not eliminate BitSetFilter and move it's
getMatcher impl to the Filter class? (if the concern is just that there be a
"higher level" class in which both methods are abstract, why not insert a
parent with some new name above the Filter class?)
For the record: it really bothers me that the old attachments got deleted ...
the inability to refresh my memory by looking at the older patches and compare
them with the current patches is extremely frustrating
> Decouple Filter from BitSet
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-584
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-584
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Search
> Affects Versions: 2.0.1
> Reporter: Peter Schäfer
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: bench-diff.txt, bench-diff.txt,
> Matcher1-ground-20070730.patch, Matcher2-default-20070730.patch,
> Matcher3-core-20070730.patch, Matcher4-contrib-misc-20070730.patch,
> Matcher5-contrib-queries-20070730.patch, Matcher6-contrib-xml-20070730.patch,
> Some Matchers.zip
>
>
> {code}
> package org.apache.lucene.search;
> public abstract class Filter implements java.io.Serializable
> {
> public abstract AbstractBitSet bits(IndexReader reader) throws IOException;
> }
> public interface AbstractBitSet
> {
> public boolean get(int index);
> }
> {code}
> It would be useful if the method =Filter.bits()= returned an abstract
> interface, instead of =java.util.BitSet=.
> Use case: there is a very large index, and, depending on the user's
> privileges, only a small portion of the index is actually visible.
> Sparsely populated =java.util.BitSet=s are not efficient and waste lots of
> memory. It would be desirable to have an alternative BitSet implementation
> with smaller memory footprint.
> Though it _is_ possibly to derive classes from =java.util.BitSet=, it was
> obviously not designed for that purpose.
> That's why I propose to use an interface instead. The default implementation
> could still delegate to =java.util.BitSet=.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
