What do we mean by diverging the code? Is it just putting <T> on the types to make them generic, or more?
If there would be major changes, I think we might value the correctness guaranteed by the fact that it's similar to Java over any performance benefits. But that is my two cents - we haven't had any performance issues with Lucene, so no need to fix what ain't broke for us. -Ben ----- Original Message ----- From: Wyatt Barnett <wyatt.barn...@gmail.com> To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org Cc: Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 2:33 PM Subject: Re: [Lucene.Net] Is a Lucene.Net Line-by-Line Jave port needed? I generally agree -- line by line just isn't the way to go unless one could find a way to completely automatically and mechanically port the java codebase. That said, I think there are a few things that should be kept in mind as the codebases begin to diverge: * Index file format is something to keep identical -- at the very least, one can ride the mass of static tooling built around java lucene indexes and keeps the door open to heterogeneous systems. * By and large the logic of the package should remain the same. IE, analyizers should have the same role in both systems. Makes for easier cross-pollenization of add-ons and extensions and allows for the body of documentation to be useful at least in spirit. Neither of those goals would require any sort of line-by-line port to be maintained. On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:19 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I agree, a line by line is of little use to me. > > Sent from my Windows Phone > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kieran Logan > Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 12:15 PM > To: lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org > Subject: RE: [Lucene.Net] Is a Lucene.Net Line-by-Line Jave port needed? > > > >> Hi Scott >> >> Can only speak for my own interests. The line-by-line port is not of >> interest or to put it another way, I would consider a .Net 4 version which >> uses the framework optimally of far greater interest than a line-by-line >> port. >> >> Kieran >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Scott Lombard [mailto:lombardena...@gmail.com] >> Sent: 29 June 2011 19:58 >> To: lucene-net-...@lucene.apache.org; lucene-net-user@lucene.apache.org >> Subject: [Lucene.Net] Is a Lucene.Net Line-by-Line Jave port needed? >> >> >> >> After the large community response about moving the code base from .Net 2.0 >> to Net 4.0 I am trying to figure out what is the need for a line-by-line >> port. Starting with Digy's excellent work on the conversion to generics a >> priority of the 2.9.4g release is the 2 packages would not be >> interchangeable. So faster turnaround from a java release won't matter to >> non line-by-line users they will have to wait until the updates are made to >> the non line-by-line code base. >> >> >> >> My question is there really a user base for the line-by-line port? Anyone >> have a comment? >> >> >> >> Scott >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
