On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 06:19:09PM -0400, Michael McCandless wrote: > > Analyzer: maybe not so much because the analysis method would be > > non-trivial. > > (Assuming that we settle on something like the KS "Inversion"-style > > Analyzers > > rather than the method-call-orgy of Lucene TokenStream.) > > What's an inversion style analyzer?
Sorry, that wasn't a good way of putting it. KS passes around Tokens as arrays rather than as iterators; Inversion is the class that holds Tokens, and it actually descends from VArray. It's hard to write an Analyzer in pure Perl that operates on multiple tokens and isn't a sloth. Because of method call overhead, having to call next() for every token makes that even harder. > OK, I'm convinced... it seems like we should stick with your approach > (make & cache host wrapper when requested or RC becomes 2). Thanks to you and Peter for driving the discussion towards an improved version of that model. Marvin Humphrey
