atom feed31 messages in org.apache.lucene.java-devFieldable, AbstractField, Field
FromSent OnAttachments
Michael McCandlessMar 17, 2008 2:06 pm 
eks devMar 17, 2008 2:37 pm 
Chris HostetterMar 18, 2008 6:26 pm 
eks devMar 19, 2008 3:45 am 
Grant IngersollMar 19, 2008 4:01 am 
Grant IngersollMar 19, 2008 5:52 am 
eks devMar 19, 2008 6:31 am 
Grant IngersollMar 19, 2008 6:48 am 
eks devMar 19, 2008 7:58 am 
Doug CuttingMar 19, 2008 10:02 am 
robert engelsMar 19, 2008 10:18 am 
Michael McCandlessMar 19, 2008 10:42 am 
Doug CuttingMar 19, 2008 11:01 am 
Chris HostetterMar 19, 2008 11:15 am 
robert engelsMar 19, 2008 11:17 am 
Michael McCandlessMar 19, 2008 12:49 pm 
eks devMar 19, 2008 3:06 pm 
robert engelsMar 19, 2008 3:39 pm 
Chris HostetterMar 19, 2008 5:57 pm 
Michael McCandlessMar 21, 2008 3:45 am 
eks devMar 23, 2008 2:28 pm 
Chris HostetterMar 24, 2008 2:14 pm 
Chris HostetterMar 24, 2008 2:19 pm 
Doug CuttingMar 24, 2008 2:31 pm 
robert engelsMar 24, 2008 3:43 pm 
Steven A RoweMar 24, 2008 3:49 pm 
Doug CuttingMar 24, 2008 4:20 pm 
Grant IngersollMar 24, 2008 5:14 pm 
robert engelsMar 24, 2008 9:46 pm 
Doug CuttingMar 25, 2008 7:29 am 
robert engelsMar 25, 2008 9:25 am 
Subject:Fieldable, AbstractField, Field
From:Michael McCandless (luc@mikemccandless.com)
Date:Mar 17, 2008 2:06:55 pm
List:org.apache.lucene.java-dev

Hi,

I'm working on LUCENE-1219, which I think is a good improvement to the Field API for creating stored binary fields based on parts of a shared byte[].

I'm not really happy with the current patch because our hands are tied by the fact that we have Fieldable as an interface. I'd really like to move that to a base class, but...

Really, I think we could go just back to a single Field class instead of the three classes Fieldable, AbstractField and Field. If we had this then LUCENE-1219 would be easier to cleanly implement.

Here're some details:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1219? page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment- tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12578199#action_12578199

Is there some reason not to do this?

Mike