[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2074?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12784906#action_12784906 ]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-2074: ------------------------------------- bq. By this whenever we create a new version/syntax, we can name it exactly like the first version it is supported. Will commit a patch later. commit a patch? or upload a patch? I still think we should wait for official Jflex release, unless a jflex developer comments on this issue otherwise :) > Use a separate JFlex generated Unicode 4 by Java 5 compatible > StandardTokenizer > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: LUCENE-2074 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2074 > Project: Lucene - Java > Issue Type: Bug > Affects Versions: 3.0 > Reporter: Uwe Schindler > Assignee: Uwe Schindler > Fix For: 3.1 > > Attachments: jflex-1.4.1-vs-1.5-snapshot.diff, jflexwarning.patch, > LUCENE-2074-lucene30.patch, LUCENE-2074.patch, LUCENE-2074.patch, > LUCENE-2074.patch, LUCENE-2074.patch, LUCENE-2074.patch > > > The current trunk version of StandardTokenizerImpl was generated by Java 1.4 > (according to the warning). In Java 3.0 we switch to Java 1.5, so we should > regenerate the file. > After regeneration the Tokenizer behaves different for some characters. > Because of that we should only use the new TokenizerImpl when > Version.LUCENE_30 or LUCENE_31 is used as matchVersion. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org