[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2309?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12844467#action_12844467
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-2309:
-------------------------------------
Hello, i commented yesterday but did not receive much feedback, so
I want to elaborate some more:
I suppose what I was trying to mention in my earlier comment here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2309?focusedCommentId=12844189&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#action_12844189
is that while I really like the new TokenStream API, i would prefer
it if we thought about making this flexible enough to support
"different paradigms", including perhaps something that looks a lot
like the old TokenStream API.
The reason is, I notice a lot of existing code still under this old API,
and I think that in some cases, perhaps its easier to work with, even
if you aren't a new user. I definitely think for newer users the old API
might have some advantages.
I think its useful to consider supporting such an API, perhaps as an extension
in contrib/analyzers, even if its not as fast or flexible as the new API,
perhaps the tradeoff of speed and flexibility would be worth the ease
for newer users.
> Fully decouple IndexWriter from analyzers
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-2309
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-2309
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Index
> Reporter: Michael McCandless
>
> IndexWriter only needs an AttributeSource to do indexing.
> Yet, today, it interacts with Field instances, holds a private
> analyzers, invokes analyzer.reusableTokenStream, has to deal with a
> wide variety (it's not analyzed; it is analyzed but it's a Reader,
> String; it's pre-analyzed).
> I'd like to have IW only interact with attr sources that already
> arrived with the fields. This would be a powerful decoupling -- it
> means others are free to make their own attr sources.
> They need not even use any of Lucene's analysis impls; eg they can
> integrate to other things like [OpenPipeline|http://www.openpipeline.org].
> Or make something completely custom.
> LUCENE-2302 is already a big step towards this: it makes IW agnostic
> about which attr is "the term", and only requires that it provide a
> BytesRef (for flex).
> Then I think LUCENE-2308 would get us most of the remaining way -- ie, if the
> FieldType knows the analyzer to use, then we could simply create a
> getAttrSource() method (say) on it and move all the logic IW has today
> onto there. (We'd still need existing IW code for back-compat).
--
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
