[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3590?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13156802#comment-13156802 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-3590: ------------------------------------- {quote} All I know is this class is abused because there was/is a need for bits and pieces that ByteBuffers don't fully address – you cannot change the underlying array (must rewrap) and you cannot fiddle with hash code, for example. I like access to internals sometimes. {quote} Right, the abuse exists... we have to accept this is just the case and deal with it appropriately, step 1 being to make sure the 'abuse use case' and the 'ordinary use case' can be clearly separated. But having a broken API that is sometimes shallow, sometimes deep, trying to support both use cases in whichever way we feel is 'natural' is unacceptable. > minimize bytesref to be a ref to a byte[] > ----------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-3590 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3590 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Bug > Affects Versions: 4.0 > Reporter: Robert Muir > Priority: Blocker > Attachments: LUCENE-3590_copyCtor.patch > > > Setting this as blocker for 4.0, as this class is used in every API there. > Currently this API is a little of a everything, sometimes its like a > stringbuffer, it > does numeric conversions, all kinds of stuff. > We need this to be a ref to a byte[], nothing else. This other stuff can go > somewhere else. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa 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