Thank you! Yes please submit a patch and we can iterate from there. Mike
"Tzvika Barenholz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello good people of Lucene! > > I've been using Lucene for a long while, but have only recently had occasion > to checkout the source code from the trunk and build it myself. When I did > so, I was alerted by my IDE (IDEA) of a large number of irregularities in > the code, some of them serious, most not. I made a patch containing some of > the obvious fixes: StringBuffer.append in stead of concatenation, Boolean > static instances instead of construction, System.arraycopy() in stead of > loops to the same effect, and Integer.toString in stead of unnecessary > construction. Minor things, to be sure, but still I thought it best to share > the diff, if you guys should think it worth committing. I did verify that > the ant common.test target passes after the change, which, unsurprisingly, > it did. > > I should note that there were many many other thing that I did not change, > for the reason that they would have made an inconveniently large patch. For > example: many methods in Lucense are redundantly declared as "private > final"; many fields can be converted into local variables with the same > functionality. In some cases strings are compared with string literals > using ==. I can give a list if anyone thinks he or she will have use for > it. > > That's it. Good night and keep up the good work! > Tzvika --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
