Yonik Seeley wrote:
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Michael McCandless
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In fact I plan to add it as Field.Index.ANALYZED_NO_NORMS, in this
issue:
I wasn't originally going to add a Field.Index at all for omitNorms,
but Doug suggested it.
The problem with this type-safe way of doing things is the
combinatorial explosion.
Yeah I realize that. Now that we have omitTF as an option we could
really go crazy ;)
I figured since we already have NOT_ANALYZED_NO_NORMS we may as well
round it out with ANALYZED_NO_NORMS, and then stop there. Plus,
people have been surprised that you could do ANALYZED_NO_NORMS, yet it
is useful.
Mike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
