On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Robert Muir <rcm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Earwin Burrfoot <ear...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 18:49, Uwe Schindler <u...@thetaphi.de> wrote: >>> In my opinion, we should not have analyzers at all (just my personal >>> opinion). "new Field(name, TokenStream)" is much enough from consistency >>> standpoint! >> >> Indeed, my friend! >> > > i agree (for the indexer), but a lot of people like to use the > QueryParser.... so we need a "tokenstream-factory" of some sort > (Analyzer today).
If it's only for the QP, a simple method that one could override would suffice: QueryParser.getTokenStream(String field, String value) If it's not just for the QP, then we have Analyzer (as you've pointed out). -Yonik http://www.lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
