[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1439?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12645829#action_12645829
]
Steven Rowe commented on LUCENE-1439:
-------------------------------------
Ivan,
I'm sorry to hear that you don't have time to devote to this issue. Patches
regularly go through a vetting process, so don't assume that yours would be
rejected, as long as you are willing to accept guidance concerning the "not
fitting". In fact, you are in a perfect position to help, since your fresh
take on the issues reflect a very common user experience. Please don't give
up.
My suggestion, like Michael's: open a new issue with a focused suggestion, and
provide a patch.
> Inconsistent API
> -----------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1439
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1439
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.0
> Environment: any
> Reporter: Ivan.S
> Priority: Minor
>
> The API of Lucene is totally inconsistent:
> 1)
> There are a lot of containers which don't implement an interface which
> indicates this fact
> (for pre-java-1.5 Lucene it could be Collection, for post-ajva-1.5 Lucene it
> could be more general Iterable)
> Example:
> IndexSearcher: "int maxDoc()" and "doc(int i)"
> 2)
> There are a lot of classes having non-final public accessible fields.
> 3)
> Some methods which return values are named something() others are named
> getSomething()
> Best one is: Fieldable:
> without get: String stringValue(), Reader readerValue(), byte[]
> binaryValue(), ...
> with get: byte[] getBinaryValue(), int getBinaryLength(), ...
--
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]
