: Ugh though. I thought we were going to be stricter about enforcing field : names to be 'Java identifier'-like characters only. Why : encourage/support # in a field name? -0
There's a differnece between encouraging people to use java identifiers, and demonstrating that some things work even if you don't. This commit didn't add any code to Solr -- ReturnFields was changed a long time ago to try parsing things multiple ways to fall back on looking for more esoteric field names as a last resort. All i did was add a test to increase the code coverage on ReturnFields to verify & demonstrate that existing code actually worked. If you guys feel strongly that tests like this shouldn't pass, you should open Jira(s) proposing that these type of features be removed. (But frankly that seems like a smack in the face to existing users). It doens't make much sense to me to object to a commit that only increases test coverage of existing code. -Hoss --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
