Hi Peter,
Yes, with the tree it is pretty straightforward. I'd prefer to do it
that way, but what is the purpose of the new qParser then? Is it just
that the qParser was built with a different paradigms in mind where
the parse tree was not in the equation? Anybody knows if there is any
advantage?
Also, a question for Peter, at which stage do you use lucene analyzers
on the query? After it was parsed into the tree, or before we start
processing the query string?
I do the analysis before creating the tree. I'm pretty sure Lucene
QueryParser does this, too.
Peter
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at
Hi,
The standard lucene/solr parsing is nice but not really flexible. I
saw questions and discussion about ANTLR, but unfortunately never a
working grammar, so... maybe you find this useful:
https://github.com/romanchyla/montysolr/tree/master/src/java/org/apache/lucene/queryParser/iqp/antlr
In
I'd love to see the progress on this.
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Roman Chyla roman.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
The standard lucene/solr parsing is nice but not really flexible. I
saw questions and discussion about ANTLR, but unfortunately never a
working grammar, so... maybe you find
Roman,
I'm not familiar with the contrib, but you can write your own Java code to
create Query objects from the tree produced by your lexer and parser
something like this:
StandardLuceneGrammarLexer lexer = new ANTLRReaderStream(new
StringReader(queryString));
CommonTokenStream tokens = new
