[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1801?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12742643#action_12742643
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1801:
---------------------------------------
No problem, thanks for the patch. I was not aware that there were two inner
classes. But they are no Tokenizers but TokenStreams. As they are the source of
tokens, they must call clearAttributes(), you are right, thanks!
If you find another one, please post a patch again, maybe I forgot more of
them. I will go to bed now.
Uwe
> Tokenizers (which are the source of Tokens) should call
> AttributeSource.clearAttributes() first
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1801
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1801
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Affects Versions: 2.9
> Reporter: Uwe Schindler
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: 2.9
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-1801.patch, LUCENE-1801.patch
>
>
> This is a followup for LUCENE-1796:
> {quote}
> Token.clear() used to be called by the consumer... but then it was switched
> to the producer here: LUCENE-1101
> I don't know if all of the Tokenizers in lucene were ever changed, but in any
> case it looks like at least some of these bugs were introduced with the
> switch to the attribute API - for example StandardTokenizer did clear it's
> reusableToken... and now it doesn't.
> {quote}
> As alternative to changing all core/contrib Tokenizers to call
> clearAttributes first, we could do this in the indexer, what would be a
> overhead for old token streams that itsself clear their reusable token. This
> issue should also update the Javadocs, to clearly state inside
> Tokenizer.java, that the source TokenStream (normally the Tokenizer) should
> clear *all* Attributes. If it does not do it and e.g. the positionIncrement
> is changed to 0 by any TokenFilter, but the filter does not change it back to
> 1, the TokenStream would stay with 0. If the TokenFilter would call
> PositionIncrementAttribute.clear() (because he is responsible), it could also
> break the TokenStream, because clear() is a general method for the whole
> attribute instance. If e.g. Token is used as AttributeImpl, a call to clear()
> would also clear offsets and termLength, which is not wanted. So the source
> of the Tokenization should rest the attributes to default values.
> LUCENE-1796 removed the iterator creation cost, so clearAttributes should run
> fast, but is an additional cost during Tokenization, as it was not done
> consistently before, so a small speed degradion is caused by this, but has
> nothing to do with the new TokenStream API.
--
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
