lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Muir (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Created] (LUCENE-7039) Improve PointRangeQuery & co
Date Sat, 20 Feb 2016 14:37:18 GMT
Robert Muir created LUCENE-7039:

             Summary: Improve PointRangeQuery & co
                 Key: LUCENE-7039
             Project: Lucene - Core
          Issue Type: Task
            Reporter: Robert Muir

The point types are now preferred for indexing numeric fields, but PointRangeQuery has some
usability issues.

I think we should make the following changes:
* {{newIntRange()}}, {{newLongRange()}}, {{newFloatRange()}},{{newDoubleRange()}}, {{newBinaryRange()}}:
simple 1D ranges consistent with NumericRangeQuery naming. 
* {{newMultiIntRange()}}, {{newMultiLongRange()}}, {{newMultiFloatRange()}}, {{newMultiDoubleRange()}},
{{newMultiBinaryRange()}}: multi-dimensional versions of the above (take arrays, a bit harder
to use, but the arrays have correct type!)
* {{toString()}} should be meaningful, it should not spew binary nonsense unless you used
a binary range!
* improve javadocs

If we like this, we could do similar improvements for the ExactPointQuery

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message