[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4040?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13271341#comment-13271341
]
Chris Male commented on LUCENE-4040:
------------------------------------
You raise an interesting point, some of the error messaging from the QPs is
poor. I've been in a situation where users were able to express complex
queries themselves but would often be confused by the error messages they
received if a query didn't parse. Some of this is related to the parsing
frameworks we use, some of it is that we could just do better. I think we'll
tackle this in another issue but it's definitely part of the overall goal to
give the QPs a big facelift.
Would you be able to tackle the surround parser documentation? You seem to have
experience using it (I haven't) and understand its quirks. Just throw up a
patch and we'll iterate.
> Improve QueryParser and supported syntax documentation
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-4040
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-4040
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: modules/queryparser
> Reporter: Chris Male
> Priority: Minor
>
> In LUCENE-4024 there were some changes to the fuzzy query syntax. Only the
> Classic QueryParser really documents its syntax, which makes it hard to know
> whether the changes effected other QPs. Compounding this issue there are
> many classes which have no javadocs at all and I found myself quite confused
> when I consolidated all the QPs into their module.
> We should do a concerted effort to improve the documentation so that it is
> clear what syntax is supported by what QPs and so that at least the user
> facing classes have javadocs.
> As part of this, I wonder whether we should give the syntax supported by the
> Classic QueryParser a new name (rather than just Lucene's query syntax) since
> other QPs can and do support other syntax, and then somehow add some typed
> control over this, so QPs have to declare programmatically that they support
> the syntax and so we can verify that by randomly plugging in implementations
> into tests.
--
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: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
