[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1768?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13100102#comment-13100102 ]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-1768: --------------------------------------- Hi Adriano, thanks. For applying the patch you have to first do a svn rename: modules/queryparser/src/java/org/apache/lucene/queryparser/flexible/standard/processors/ParametricRangeQueryNodeProcessor.java -> modules/queryparser/src/java/org/apache/lucene/queryparser/flexible/standard/processors/TermRangeQueryNodeProcessor.java After doing this, the patch applies. I will verify the changes and respond back later. I will apply the 3.x javadoc/code changes to the 3.x and 3.4 branches. > NumericRange support for new query parser > ----------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-1768 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1768 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: core/queryparser > Affects Versions: 2.9 > Reporter: Uwe Schindler > Assignee: Uwe Schindler > Labels: contrib, gsoc, gsoc2011, lucene-gsoc-11, mentor > Fix For: 4.0 > > Attachments: TestNumericQueryParser-fix.patch, > TestNumericQueryParser-fix.patch, TestNumericQueryParser-fix.patch, > TestNumericQueryParser-fix.patch, week-14.patch, week-7.patch, week-8.patch, > week1.patch, week11-13_for_lucene_3x.patch, week11-13_for_lucene_3x.patch, > week15_for_lucene_3x.patch, week15_for_trunk.patch, week2.patch, week3.patch, > week4.patch, week5-6.patch > > > It would be good to specify some type of "schema" for the query parser in > future, to automatically create NumericRangeQuery for different numeric > types? It would then be possible to index a numeric value > (double,float,long,int) using NumericField and then the query parser knows, > which type of field this is and so it correctly creates a NumericRangeQuery > for strings like "[1.567..*]" or "(1.787..19.5]". > There is currently no way to extract if a field is numeric from the index, so > the user will have to configure the FieldConfig objects in the ConfigHandler. > But if this is done, it will not be that difficult to implement the rest. > The only difference between the current handling of RangeQuery is then the > instantiation of the correct Query type and conversion of the entered numeric > values (simple Number.valueOf(...) cast of the user entered numbers). > Evenerything else is identical, NumericRangeQuery also supports the MTQ > rewrite modes (as it is a MTQ). > Another thing is a change in Date semantics. There are some strange flags in > the current parser that tells it how to handle dates. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org