> Today we are considering a two part approach. Eventually, we will evaluate > whether to port to JCC pyLucene, or to bite the bullet and go the full Java > Lucene route. The GCJ version has served us well in a single thread app, and > we believe a JCC version will work great, but sorting out the JCC/windows > build process may be more risky for us than simply implementing Java Lucene, > with all its horrors. [Simply? Did I just say that?]
The JCC build process is so much simpler than the GCJ build process. But of course everything is hard (for developers) on Windows. Re-writing in Java is an interesting option. Last week I took an indexing program I had in Java, and re-wrote it for JCC PyLucene. It shrunk to 1/6 the size of the Java version. I also ported a search program I'd written in GCJ PyLucene to JCC PyLucene. It took two days, but mainly that was poking at a bug in JCC (which got fixed between the time I went to bed and the time I got up again in the morning :-). The code transferred over without any significant changes. Bill _______________________________________________ pylucene-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/pylucene-dev
