Apologies for the misleading quote, but you got the right syntax in
the end it would seem.
I believe that the add(x,false,false) is just what you need for OR...
The Unary version is kind of ok -- OR is at least one member of a set
present... the set of size one is still a set, it just happens
> -Original Message-
> From: Doug Cutting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2002 5:05 PM
> To: 'Lucene Developers List'; Lucene Users List
> Subject: RE: Lucene Query Structure
>
>
>
> Good analogies for the semantics
> From: Joshua O'Madadhain [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> After considerable study of the documentation, I am still
> confused about the semantics of BooleanQuery.
>
> Now, as sjb pointed out, "(query, false, false)" doesn't
> really seem to have the semantics of a boolean OR.
In fact, it doe
Actually, Winton's suggestion doesn't work because it's inconsistent with
the syntax of BooleanQuery() (the constructor doesn't take arguments, and
add() takes one Query argument, not two).
After considerable study of the documentation, I am still confused about
the semantics of BooleanQuery. I
BQ(Term, Term, Include, Exclude)
BQ(
BQ(a,b,true,false)
BQ(a,b,true,false)
false,
false)
Should work...
Winton
>Lets say I have two queries which I want to combine into one:
>
>(a and b) OR (c and d)
>
>I would use QueryParser.parse to form the subqueries, but how do I/can I
>combine
