[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1768?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12742458#action_12742458
]
Adriano Crestani commented on LUCENE-1768:
------------------------------------------
{quote}
I would propose to absorb the RangeTools/Utils and DateTools/Utils (ehat is the
correct name???) in one configuration class
{quote}
+1 this way is easier for the user to config
{quote}
I was thinking about that, too. But here the API clearly defines, that
getRangeQuery() returns a Query object without further specification. So the
change was correct from the API/BW side. The change that another object is
returned is documented in CHANGES.txt (as far as I know). We have here the same
problem: You change the inner class implementations, but the abstract
QueryParser's API is stable. The general contract when doing such things is,
that you use instanceof checks before you try to cast some abstract return type
to something specific, not documented.
{quote}
Agreed, I also think it's fine as long as it's documented
> NumericRange support for new query parser
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1768
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1768
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: QueryParser
> Affects Versions: 2.9
> Reporter: Uwe Schindler
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: 2.9
>
>
> It would be good to specify some type of "schema" for the query parser in
> future, to automatically create NumericRangeQuery for different numeric
> types? It would then be possible to index a numeric value
> (double,float,long,int) using NumericField and then the query parser knows,
> which type of field this is and so it correctly creates a NumericRangeQuery
> for strings like "[1.567..*]" or "(1.787..19.5]".
> There is currently no way to extract if a field is numeric from the index, so
> the user will have to configure the FieldConfig objects in the ConfigHandler.
> But if this is done, it will not be that difficult to implement the rest.
> The only difference between the current handling of RangeQuery is then the
> instantiation of the correct Query type and conversion of the entered numeric
> values (simple Number.valueOf(...) cast of the user entered numbers).
> Evenerything else is identical, NumericRangeQuery also supports the MTQ
> rewrite modes (as it is a MTQ).
> Another thing is a change in Date semantics. There are some strange flags in
> the current parser that tells it how to handle dates.
--
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: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
