If you're wanting to test the current cvs version then check the code out from cvs and apply the patch attached to this post.
(copy the patch into the directory that you ran the cvs checkout command in, then run: patch < FieldSortedHitQueueJava13.patch) Then compile, and you'll have a lucene 1.4 jar that works on a 1.3 jvm. jamie --- Terry Steichen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I wonder if someone could clear up this issue. I'd > like to test the latest > CVS version, but it won't compile (because it can't > find > java.util.regex.Pattern). If this regex-dependency > is to remain, is there a > way that us non-1.4-JVM users could add some library > to get around this > problem? Or, is there a plan to remove it, or at > least make it optional? > > Regards, > > Terry > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Doug Cutting" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Lucene Developers List" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 1:33 PM > Subject: Re: New FieldSortedHitQueue uses Java 1.4 > feature > > > > Robert Engels wrote: > > > Seems like a bad precedent... if developers have > to worry about coding > > > around problems in specific JDK's, it could be a > nightmare. What about > the > > > next user who uses some JDK than is less > mainstream? > > > > I think you're responding to the other branch of > this thread! > > > > What I was suggesting here is that Tim remove the > regex code from the > > Lucene 1.4 codebase, since it requires Java 1.4, > while everything else > > in Lucene requires only Java 1.2. > > > > Separately, there's the issue of how Lucene should > handle a bug in IBM's > > 1.3 JIT, but that's not what I was talking about > here. > > > > Doug > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 11:57 AM > > > To: Lucene Developers List > > > Subject: Re: New FieldSortedHitQueue uses Java > 1.4 feature > > > > > > > > > Tim Jones wrote: > > > > > >>But, if this is the only code depending on java > 1.4, it seems like it > > > > > > would > > > > > >>be better to remove it for better version > compatibility. Perhaps what > > > > > > would > > > > > >>be best would be to have the code detect which > version it's running > under > > >>and act appropriately. > > > > > > > > > I vote for just removing it, and keeping Lucene > 1.4 compatible with Java > > > 1.2. I don't think it's worth trying to detect > the version. You might > > > add a comment, or even a commented-out 1.4-based > implementation, to mark > > > this as something to revisit when we eventually > move Lucene to Java 1.4. > > > > > > Doug > > > > > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
