I realize that - we wouldn't want to make them optional anyway because that
would not be CLS compliant (which we may never fully achieve, but should
probably try to minimize the impact for in case we eventually want to go there).
Besides, one of the "users" are the unit tests and they require
Itamar,
I think for those rare cases, we should leave it in. But, it would be a good
idea to add overloads that default them to the current version so most users
get a streamlined experience.
You mentioned that you were "removing" them, I hope that you meant that you are
simply providing
Github user synhershko commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/191
> AFAIK, the Support namespace is for pieces that need to be sourced from
the JDK and/or close approximations to what is in the JDK that don't exist in
the .NET framework.
This is
I've had several reports on ICU4NET dependencies mostly on cloud
environments - probably due to the native assemblies that are shipped with
it. Let's make sure we are using a solution that runs on the CLR and work
well.
--
Itamar Syn-Hershko
http://code972.com | @synhershko
Our nuget/myget packages are released only for 4.5.1 and up. I think we
should release for as many platforms as we can - what do you think? Connie
is on the .NET team in Microsoft and might have insights on this.
In addition, I tried running a demo app (
Github user synhershko commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/174
@NightOwl888 go ahead. Spatial4n will be a bit challenging due to strong
naming and possibly dependencies not being up-to-date. Let's take it there.
---
If your project is set up for it, you
It's a required argument for those methods - while I think it's too verbose
there as well, at least it makes sense because they have many versions. We
don't really need it because we only have one version, except from the rare
cases backwards supporting indexes that are shared with Java code that
Github user synhershko commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/193#discussion_r87320660
--- Diff: src/Lucene.Net.Core/Support/HashMap.cs ---
@@ -125,9 +140,87 @@ public TValue AddIfAbsent(TKey key, TValue value)
return
Great feedback Shad, thanks
Yes, let's add AnonymousAnalyzer to core - or see if we can just use the
Analyzer class for this. This indeed looks better - the demo was just a
quick'n'dirty something I wrote, but it was intended especially for finding
pain-points like you just did. Another
Itamar,
Thanks for putting this together.
The demo made me realize something about the design of Analyzer that I didn't
realize before. The abstract Analyzer class was designed to be used with Java's
anonymous class functionality in mind. This makes creating custom Analyzers
more concise in
10 matches
Mail list logo
