1> my test cases throw some exceptions with the code as-is. The
spans.get(0)
is a problem in that it's not guaranteed that the spans returned will
have
anything in them. Also, I don't think that the test for
reqSpans.get(0).next
in queryClauses[i].isRequired is correct (even if it doesn't throw
exceptions). Isn't the sense there that we want to include the spans
if we
*do* have entries??
You should get a Spans object back no matter what, hence the .get(0). If
the Spans object returned has no Spans in it, then the first call to
next will return false.
2> But more importantly, I think this throws things in the "span bucket"
across documents. Consicer two documents with text "a b c d e f" is in
one
document, and "x y z" is in another, and we query on "a AND z", it seems
like extractSpansFromTermQuery would return one span from each document,
which would satisfy the tests in getSpansFromBooleanQuery
inappropriately.
This might be the case. I have not considered it...I am working with
real hit highlighting and so I only work with a single document at a time.
Is it just me or is working with Spans really intended to be "one pass
through and only forward"? There are several places in the SpansExtractor
code where we want to ask "are there any spans in here?". But to ask
that,
you have to call next(). Which changes the state of the Spans such
that you
have to be really careful when you use any Spans that have had this test
performed already and do a do..while (spans.next()); rather than a
while (
spans.next()) {}..... Ditto with skipTo.
Could be. I'll do some testing.
I haven't thrown any exceptions yet, but I am working with a single doc
in a memoryindex. So far I have yet to see a problem. I will keep looking.
- Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
