> I would like to go forward with moving the classes into the right packages > and optimize the way, how queries and analyzers are created (only one > class > for each). The idea from LUCENE-1673 to use static factories to create > these > classes for the different data types seems to be more elegant and simplier > to maintain than the current way (having a class for each bit size). > > So I think I will start with 1673 and try to present something useable, > soon > (but without payloads, so the payload/position-bits setting is "0").
Another question not so simple to answer: When embedding these TermPositions into the whole process, how would this work with MultiTermQuery? The current algorithm is simple: The TrieRangeTermEnum simply enumerates the possible terms from the index and MTQ creates the BitSet or a BooleanQuery of TermQueries. How to do this with positions? In both cases there need specialities (the TermEnum must return that the actual term is a payload/position one and must filter using TermPositions). For the filter its then easy, the TermQueries added to BooleanQuery in the other case must also use the payloads. Questions & more questions. I tend to release TrieRange with 2.9 without Positions/Payloads. Uwe --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
