If there is no difference then is there an underlying basic difference
or just a simple redundancy (both types performing the same job) is there? I
feel that it cann't be a simple redundancy.
I can't help but feel a bit frustrated by this question. Lucene is open source, and if you are really curious about the internals, crack it open and have a look. Field.java is a pretty simplistic class, and easy to understand. The only difference is one take a Reader and the other a String for the field value - and internally a String is converted to a StringReader. So it's not redundant since the input types are different, but the basic flags set on them are identical.
Erik
Thanks, Jitender ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Hatcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Lucene Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 8:00 AM Subject: Re: "UnStored" vs "Reader"
On May 15, 2004, at 7:00 AM, jitender ahuja wrote:Is there a basic difference between the "UnStored" and the "Reader" field types?
No difference at all in how they are handled. Both indexed, and tokenized, and not stored.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
