: Storage is a separate mechanism from indexing, so my _guess_ is that : if you want Readers to be stored, it would result in having to use : the Reader twice (once for indexing and once for storage), which : isn't possible, I don't believe, since not all Readers support the : mark() and reset() functionality. Besides, you will get better : performance reading once...
To elaborate: this really isn't a flaw in the way Fields work -- the fact that seperate mechanisms are involved doesn't result in any penalty that you wouldn't also be facing if it was done at once.... The advantage of indexing a "Reader" based Field is that you can tokenize/index a stream of text from a Reader without needing the entire contents the Reader refrences in memory at one time -- it's a true stream opeeration. Storing a field requires the full data set to be available in memory at once -- so if you are going to Store the data, you have to read it into a String anyway. That said, it would certainly be possible to have a convince method that let you construct a Stored Field with a Reader, and it could slurp in the whole reader for you, but it would be missleading to people who expect the Reader based Fields to be stream based. -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
