If it's easier to keep the sync between java and C# with Sharpen, the price of the sharpen-specific classes is maybe not that high.
My 2 cents Regards, On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 14:08:02 -0500 (EST), "Neal Granroth (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org> wrote: > [ > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-380?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12969427#action_12969427 > ] > > Neal Granroth commented on LUCENENET-380: > ----------------------------------------- > > I had looked them over several weeks ago, but had no additional comment > than the one you'd made about needing to find a way to eliminate > conversions which make use of Sharpen-specific classes. Hopefully others > with a larger stake than I in keeping the project alive will chime in. > > >> Evaluate Sharpen as a port tool >> ------------------------------- >> >> Key: LUCENENET-380 >> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENENET-380 >> Project: Lucene.Net >> Issue Type: Task >> Reporter: George Aroush >> Attachments: >> 3.0.2_JavaToCSharpConverter_AfterPostProcessing.zip, >> 3.0.2_JavaToCSharpConverter_NoPostProcessing.zip, >> IndexWriter.java, Lucene.Net.Sharpen20101104.zip, >> Lucene.Net.Sharpen20101114.zip, NIOFSDirectory.java, >> QueryParser.java, TestBufferedIndexInput.java, >> TestDateFilter.java >> >> >> This task is to evaluate Sharpen as a port tool for Lucene.Net. >> The files to be evaluated are attached. We need to run those files >> (which are off Java Lucene 2.9.2) against Sharpen and compare the result >> against JLCA result.
