You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucenenet.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2021/03/14 12:40:26 UTC
[GitHub] [lucenenet] NightOwl888 opened a new pull request #442: Reviewed Reverse() calls
NightOwl888 opened a new pull request #442:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/442
Since `Reverse()` on collections is an expensive operation, this review is just to ensure we aren't using it unnecessarily.
There was one instances in `Lucene.Net.Suggest` where using `Stack<T>` could be used instead of reversing the output, and one instance where sorting the output was completely unnecessary. In the latter case, using `JCG.HashSet<T>` has already solved the test failures because its `Equals()` method respects set equality by default.
Also, an unnecessary lock was removed that had been added during the port.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [lucenenet] NightOwl888 merged pull request #442: Reviewed Reverse() calls
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
NightOwl888 merged pull request #442:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/442
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
RE: [GitHub] [lucenenet] NightOwl888 opened a new pull request #442:
Reviewed Reverse() calls
Posted by Shad Storhaug <sh...@shadstorhaug.com>.
Yogi,
I saw a couple of your emails, and they were addressed to users@infra.apache.org, so I ignored them because I assumed you wanted to be unsubscribed from that list, not dev@lucenenet.apache.org (you did not specify which one). Do note that each mailing list is separate, may be moderated by different people, and you have to subscribe/unsubscribe from each separately.
That being said, Atri is correct. Mailing lists are a self-help thing and there is no reason to get a human involved. For this list:
1. Send an email to dev-unsubscrbe@lucenenet.apache.org
2. Reply to the response (check your SPAM folder if necessary) to complete the handshake
If you don't reply to the response, you will NOT be unsubscribed.
You will have to repeat this for users-unsubscribe@infra.apache.org if you also want to be unsubscribed from that list or follow the <listname>-unsubscribe@<projectname>.apache.org pattern for any other lists you wish to unsubscribe from.
If you are still having issues getting unsubscribed from dev@lucenenet.apache.org, let us know. But if you are having trouble with other mailing lists, I suggest emailing users@infra.apache.org to explain the situation (do note you have to subscribe to that list first before emailing to it to receive replies).
Thanks,
Shad Storhaug
Project Chairperson - Apache Lucene.NET
-----Original Message-----
From: Atri Sharma <at...@apache.org>
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2021 10:47 PM
To: Yogi Valani <dr...@gmail.com>
Cc: dev <de...@lucenenet.apache.org>; users@infra.apache.org
Subject: Re: [GitHub] [lucenenet] NightOwl888 opened a new pull request #442: Reviewed Reverse() calls
https://lucenenet.apache.org/contributing/mailing-lists.html
This page clearly states the process to subscribe (and unsubscribe) from the list.
Atri
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 9:05 PM Yogi Valani <dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have repeatedly asked to be removed from this mailing list. This
> mailing list is in violation of UK Marketing and Advertising laws (
> https://www.gov.uk/marketing-advertising-law/direct-marketing)
>
> But can someone please remove my mail address from the dev@lucenenet.apache.org list; and update all future mails sent to have an unsubscribe link in the emails sent.
>
> Regards
>
> Yogi
>
> NB: I do understand this is an open source project and benefits to the IT community as a whole. By referring to the law, this is in no way is this a threat (direct or implied) of legal action.
>
> On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 at 12:40, GitBox <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> NightOwl888 opened a new pull request #442:
>> URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/442
>>
>>
>> Since `Reverse()` on collections is an expensive operation, this review is just to ensure we aren't using it unnecessarily.
>>
>> There was one instances in `Lucene.Net.Suggest` where using `Stack<T>` could be used instead of reversing the output, and one instance where sorting the output was completely unnecessary. In the latter case, using `JCG.HashSet<T>` has already solved the test failures because its `Equals()` method respects set equality by default.
>>
>> Also, an unnecessary lock was removed that had been added during the port.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
>> To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL
>> above to go to the specific comment.
>>
>> For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
>> users@infra.apache.org
>>
>>
--
Regards,
Atri
Apache Concerted
Re: [GitHub] [lucenenet] NightOwl888 opened a new pull request #442:
Reviewed Reverse() calls
Posted by Atri Sharma <at...@apache.org>.
https://lucenenet.apache.org/contributing/mailing-lists.html
This page clearly states the process to subscribe (and unsubscribe)
from the list.
Atri
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 9:05 PM Yogi Valani <dr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have repeatedly asked to be removed from this mailing list. This mailing list is in violation of UK Marketing and Advertising laws ( https://www.gov.uk/marketing-advertising-law/direct-marketing)
>
> But can someone please remove my mail address from the dev@lucenenet.apache.org list; and update all future mails sent to have an unsubscribe link in the emails sent.
>
> Regards
>
> Yogi
>
> NB: I do understand this is an open source project and benefits to the IT community as a whole. By referring to the law, this is in no way is this a threat (direct or implied) of legal action.
>
> On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 at 12:40, GitBox <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> NightOwl888 opened a new pull request #442:
>> URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/442
>>
>>
>> Since `Reverse()` on collections is an expensive operation, this review is just to ensure we aren't using it unnecessarily.
>>
>> There was one instances in `Lucene.Net.Suggest` where using `Stack<T>` could be used instead of reversing the output, and one instance where sorting the output was completely unnecessary. In the latter case, using `JCG.HashSet<T>` has already solved the test failures because its `Equals()` method respects set equality by default.
>>
>> Also, an unnecessary lock was removed that had been added during the port.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
>> To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
>> URL above to go to the specific comment.
>>
>> For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
>> users@infra.apache.org
>>
>>
--
Regards,
Atri
Apache Concerted
Re: [GitHub] [lucenenet] NightOwl888 opened a new pull request #442:
Reviewed Reverse() calls
Posted by Yogi Valani <dr...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I have repeatedly asked to be removed from this mailing list. This mailing
list is in violation of UK Marketing and Advertising laws (
https://www.gov.uk/marketing-advertising-law/direct-marketing)
But can someone please remove my mail address from the
dev@lucenenet.apache.org list; and update all future mails sent to have an
unsubscribe link in the emails sent.
Regards
Yogi
NB: I do understand this is an open source project and benefits to the IT
community as a whole. By referring to the law, this is in no way is this a
threat (direct or implied) of legal action.
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 at 12:40, GitBox <gi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> NightOwl888 opened a new pull request #442:
> URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/442
>
>
> Since `Reverse()` on collections is an expensive operation, this review
> is just to ensure we aren't using it unnecessarily.
>
> There was one instances in `Lucene.Net.Suggest` where using `Stack<T>`
> could be used instead of reversing the output, and one instance where
> sorting the output was completely unnecessary. In the latter case, using
> `JCG.HashSet<T>` has already solved the test failures because its
> `Equals()` method respects set equality by default.
>
> Also, an unnecessary lock was removed that had been added during the
> port.
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
> To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
> URL above to go to the specific comment.
>
> For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
> users@infra.apache.org
>
>
>