There is some code in contrib with comments claiming this interning is
actually slower. I think it was the MemoryIndex? Has this ever been
discussed?
- Mark
Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
I'm not looking at the code now, but I believe this is because those Strings
are interned, and I believe they are interned precisely so that this (faster)
comparison can be done.
Otis
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Simpy -- http://www.simpy.com/ - Tag - Search - Share
----- Original Message ----
From: poeta simbolista <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: java-user@lucene.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 12:47:36 PM
Subject: FieldCacheImpl mistake?
Hi guys,
I have been diving into the FieldCacheImpl code.
I have seen sth on actual version:
Revision 488908 - (view) (download) (annotate) - [select for diffs]
Modified Wed Dec 20 03:47:09 2006 UTC (8 weeks ago) by yonik
File length: 13425 byte(s)
that I wonder if it's not totally right, or if it is, I would like to know
why.
In the creation of eeach cache (Int, Float, String) there is a String
comparison using != instead of equals method:
if (term==null || term.field() != field) break;
I hope this can be useful... though i have used the code and it seems to
work perfectly.
Cheers
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
