[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2110?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12785996#action_12785996
]
Michael McCandless commented on LUCENE-2110:
--------------------------------------------
This is a great improvement Uwe... I like it.
Is an MTQ allowed to return nextSeekTerm's out of order? (I know NRQ/automaton
don't need to do so, but, if it's fine we should maybe call that out in the
javadocs...). Though, FilteredTermsEnum, being a "TermsEnum", is "supposed" to
return terms in getTermComparator() order... however its consumers (the rewrite
methods for MTQ) usually don't in fact care. Hmm I wonder if it should even
subclass TermsEnum? It doesn't seek and it's free to return terms in a
different order...
> Change FilteredTermsEnum to work like Iterator, so it is not positioned and
> next() must be always called first. Remove empty()
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2110
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2110
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Search
> Affects Versions: Flex Branch
> Reporter: Uwe Schindler
> Assignee: Uwe Schindler
> Fix For: Flex Branch
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-2110.patch
>
>
> FilteredTermsEnum is confusing as it is initially positioned to the first
> term. It should instead work like an uninitialized TermsEnum for a field
> before the first call to next() or seek().
> Also document that not all FilteredTermsEnums may implement seek() as eg. NRQ
> or Automaton are not able to support this. Seeking is also not needed for MTQ
> at all, so seek can just throw UOE.
--
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]
