You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> on 2009/09/25 15:58:40 UTC
Query Parsing was Fwd: Lab - Esqueranto
Has anyone looked/used Antlr for Query Parser capabilities? There was
some discussion over at Apache Labs that might bear discussing in
light of our new Query Parser contrib.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>
> Date: August 17, 2009 8:09:04 PM EDT
> To: labs@labs.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Lab - Esqueranto
> Reply-To: labs@labs.apache.org
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Grant
> Ingersoll<gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 2, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Tim Williams wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Martin,
>>> Sure, if it works like I envision it, Lucene would just be *one*
>>> concrete tree grammar implementation - there could be others (ie
>>> OracleText), I'm thinking it is broader than one implementation -
>>> otherwise, I reckon it's Yet Another Lucene Query Parser (YALQP).
>>>
>>> For more practical reasons, I'm not a Lucene committer and it'd be
>>> slow going to play around with this through JIRA patches to their
>>> sandbox.
>>
>> FWIW, Lucene has recently added a new, more flexible Query Parser
>> that
>> allows for separation of the various pieces (syntax, intermediate
>> representation, Lucene Query). You might want to check it out and
>> see how
>> that fits
>
> Thanks Grant, yeah I've looked at that and it seems really (overly?)
> complex for what I'm trying to achieve. It seems to re-implement much
> of the goodness that antlr provides for free. For example, with antlr
> I already get a lexer/parser grammar separate from the tree grammar.
> So, to plug in a new parser syntax is trivial - just implement a new
> lexer/parser grammar that provides tree rewrites consistent with a
> lucene tree grammar. Conversely, to implement a new concrete
> implementation, just implement a new tree grammar for the existing
> lexer/parser grammar.
>
> Of course, maybe I'll get down this road and realize how naive my path
> is and just switch over. For now, just looking at a query parser
> that, by itself, is approaching the size of the lucene core code base
> is intimidating:) Thanks for the pointer though, I'm subscribed over
> there and keep an eye out for progress on the new parser....
>
> Thanks,
> --tim
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org
>
Re: Query Parsing was Fwd: Lab - Esqueranto
Posted by Earwin Burrfoot <ea...@gmail.com>.
We use antlr, though without its tree api, it's a bit of overkill.
It directly builds a query in our intermediate format which is
traversed for synonym/phrase detection and converted to lucene query.
The library/language itself is pretty easy to learn, flexible, and has
a nice IDE.
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 19:17, Peter Keegan <pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We're using Antlr for our query parsing. What I like about it:
> - flexibility of separate lexer/parser and tree api
> - excellent IDE for building/testing the grammar
> However, the learning curve was quite long for me, although this was my
> first real encounter with parsers.
>
> Peter
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> Has anyone looked/used Antlr for Query Parser capabilities? There was
>> some discussion over at Apache Labs that might bear discussing in light of
>> our new Query Parser contrib.
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> From: Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>
>> Date: August 17, 2009 8:09:04 PM EDT
>> To: labs@labs.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Lab - Esqueranto
>> Reply-To: labs@labs.apache.org
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Grant Ingersoll<gs...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 2, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Tim Williams wrote:
>>
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> Sure, if it works like I envision it, Lucene would just be *one*
>>
>> concrete tree grammar implementation - there could be others (ie
>>
>> OracleText), I'm thinking it is broader than one implementation -
>>
>> otherwise, I reckon it's Yet Another Lucene Query Parser (YALQP).
>>
>> For more practical reasons, I'm not a Lucene committer and it'd be
>>
>> slow going to play around with this through JIRA patches to their
>>
>> sandbox.
>>
>> FWIW, Lucene has recently added a new, more flexible Query Parser that
>>
>> allows for separation of the various pieces (syntax, intermediate
>>
>> representation, Lucene Query). You might want to check it out and see how
>>
>> that fits
>>
>> Thanks Grant, yeah I've looked at that and it seems really (overly?)
>> complex for what I'm trying to achieve. It seems to re-implement much
>> of the goodness that antlr provides for free. For example, with antlr
>> I already get a lexer/parser grammar separate from the tree grammar.
>> So, to plug in a new parser syntax is trivial - just implement a new
>> lexer/parser grammar that provides tree rewrites consistent with a
>> lucene tree grammar. Conversely, to implement a new concrete
>> implementation, just implement a new tree grammar for the existing
>> lexer/parser grammar.
>>
>> Of course, maybe I'll get down this road and realize how naive my path
>> is and just switch over. For now, just looking at a query parser
>> that, by itself, is approaching the size of the lucene core code base
>> is intimidating:) Thanks for the pointer though, I'm subscribed over
>> there and keep an eye out for progress on the new parser....
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --tim
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко (earwin@gmail.com)
Home / Mobile: +7 (495) 683-567-4 / +7 (903) 5-888-423
ICQ: 104465785
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org
Re: Query Parsing was Fwd: Lab - Esqueranto
Posted by Peter Keegan <pe...@gmail.com>.
We're using Antlr for our query parsing. What I like about it:
- flexibility of separate lexer/parser and tree api
- excellent IDE for building/testing the grammar
However, the learning curve was quite long for me, although this was my
first real encounter with parsers.
Peter
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>wrote:
> Has anyone looked/used Antlr for Query Parser capabilities? There was some
> discussion over at Apache Labs that might bear discussing in light of our
> new Query Parser contrib.
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>
> *Date: *August 17, 2009 8:09:04 PM EDT
> *To: *labs@labs.apache.org
> *Subject: **Re: Lab - Esqueranto*
> *Reply-To: *labs@labs.apache.org
>
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM, Grant Ingersoll<gs...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>
> On Aug 2, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Tim Williams wrote:
>
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> Sure, if it works like I envision it, Lucene would just be *one*
>
> concrete tree grammar implementation - there could be others (ie
>
> OracleText), I'm thinking it is broader than one implementation -
>
> otherwise, I reckon it's Yet Another Lucene Query Parser (YALQP).
>
>
> For more practical reasons, I'm not a Lucene committer and it'd be
>
> slow going to play around with this through JIRA patches to their
>
> sandbox.
>
>
> FWIW, Lucene has recently added a new, more flexible Query Parser that
>
> allows for separation of the various pieces (syntax, intermediate
>
> representation, Lucene Query). You might want to check it out and see how
>
> that fits
>
>
> Thanks Grant, yeah I've looked at that and it seems really (overly?)
> complex for what I'm trying to achieve. It seems to re-implement much
> of the goodness that antlr provides for free. For example, with antlr
> I already get a lexer/parser grammar separate from the tree grammar.
> So, to plug in a new parser syntax is trivial - just implement a new
> lexer/parser grammar that provides tree rewrites consistent with a
> lucene tree grammar. Conversely, to implement a new concrete
> implementation, just implement a new tree grammar for the existing
> lexer/parser grammar.
>
> Of course, maybe I'll get down this road and realize how naive my path
> is and just switch over. For now, just looking at a query parser
> that, by itself, is approaching the size of the lucene core code base
> is intimidating:) Thanks for the pointer though, I'm subscribed over
> there and keep an eye out for progress on the new parser....
>
> Thanks,
> --tim
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscribe@labs.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: labs-help@labs.apache.org
>
>
>
>