[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 09/08/2006 20:32:20: > Heh... interfaces strike again. > > Well then since we *know* that no one has their own implementation > (because they would not have been able to register it), we should be > able to safely upgrade the interface to a class (anyone want to supply > a patch?) > > -Yonik
I'd be happy to do supply this patch - unless someone already works on it (Oliver?). I have one more comment on the cache implementation. It feels to me somewhat not right that a static system wide object (FieldCache.DEFAULT) is managing the field caching for all the indexReaders in the JVM (possibly of different indexes), when in fact there is no dependency/relation/cooperation between the different indexReaders, cache wise. It seems cleaner and simpler to have FieldCacheImpl take care of a single IndexReader, and so have that cache "belong" to the indexReader. This would make the cache implementation simpler. Synchronization would only need to be on field values. This way we also get rid of the WeakHashMap (which, btw, I never got to fully trust). Regards, Doron --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
