On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Simon Willnauer <[email protected]> wrote: > While we are on it, would it make sense to move omitTfAP into the > Index enum. It always felt odd that you can omit norms using the enum > but use a setter to omit TF & Pos.
I think the attempted move to type safety / enums is what added the most complexity to Field, and I think it's a mistake to go further down the path of combinatorial explosion. I don't care if new enum values are made, just please don't remove the setters. -Yonik http://www.lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
