[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5183?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13752376#comment-13752376
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-5183:
-------------------------------------
Thats intentional: when there is a complex boolean expression, i do this on
purpose to make it more readable and intent and precedence clear.
I dont see a benefit of using ! here, it only makes code more difficult to
read. I generally avoid it entirely these days.
> BinaryDocValues inconsistencies
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5183
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5183
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Robert Muir
> Attachments: LUCENE-5183.patch
>
>
> Some current inconsistencies:
> * Binary/SortedDocValues.EMPTY_BYTES should be removed (BytesRef.EMPTY_BYTES
> should be used in its place): FieldCache.getDocsWithField should be used to
> determine missing. Thats fine if FC wants to "back" its Bits by some special
> placeholder value, but thats its impl detail not part of the API.
> * Sorting comparator of Binary should either be removed (is this REALLY
> useful?) or should support missingValue(): and it should support this for
> SortedDocValues in any case: solr does it, but lucene wont allow it accept
> for numerics?!
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
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
