[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1926?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12759570#action_12759570
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-1926:
-------------------------------------
bq. Yes, I think calling captureState() before incrementToken() doesn't make
sense (as case:2 does) since the state would seem to be undefined at that point?
This is because its out of context (I had to narrow the test down).
The idea was that in case 2, i wanted to capture the unchanged TermAttribute
from case 1 (since i felt if i didnt call incrementToken, it would not be
changed)
> Back compat break with old next() consumer API
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-1926
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1926
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Analysis
> Affects Versions: 2.9
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: CaptureStateTestcase.java
>
>
> There is a bug that causes tokenstreams to return different results,
> depending upon whether they are consumed with the incrementToken() api or the
> next() api.
> I found this because the Solr analysis tool in the admin page uses the next()
> api, and i was seeing strange results.
> I've created a test case to show the problem. when calling captureState(),
> the current state is erased, but only when consuming with the next() api.
> If I consume with incrementToken(), things work.
> {code}
> State tempState = captureState(); // after we capture state here, things get
> strange.
> String right = termAtt.term(); // when using old consumer API, this value is
> wrong!!!!
> {code}
--
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
