[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2738?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12982607#action_12982607
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-2738:
-------------------------------------
Mike just reminded me about this one:
My concern for not committing is that we would actually reduce test coverage,
because most tests will create say field "foobar" in a loop like this:
{noformat}
for (....) {
newField("foobar"....);
}
{noformat}
So because removing norms/omitTFAP is infectious, i think we will end out
only testing certain cases... unless we change the patch so that this random
value
is "remembered" per field name during the length of the test... i think thats
the
right solution (adding hashmap)
> improve test coverage for omitNorms and omitTFAP
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2738
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2738
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Test
> Components: Build
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Fix For: 4.0
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-2738.patch, LUCENE-2738.patch, LUCENE-2738.patch
>
>
> just expands on what lucenetestcase does already...
> if you say Analyzed_NO_NORMS, we might set norms anyway.
> in the same sense, if you say Index.NO, we might index it anyway, and might
> set omitTFAP etc.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
