You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by Gregor Heinrich <he...@igd.fhg.de> on 2003/11/06 15:13:54 UTC
[FilterIndexReader]; [build.xml] RC2 package build issues.
Hello,
thanks for the nice release candidate RC2 of Lucene 1.3.
I have one question about the FilterIndexReader which is newly introduced in
rc2.
While the regular ant-based build works fine, my IDE (Eclipse R2.1.1) keeps
complaining about the method
FilterIndexReader.FilterTermPositions.nextPosition() where the member in is
referenced. Although it actually is the same variable in a twofold
interpretation -- inherited from FilterTermDocs and accessed via enclosing
scope also from FilterTermDocs -- the compiler frontend detects an error. I
think it would not
be a problem for anyone to make the reference explicit by replacing
((TermPositions)in).nextPosition()
by
((TermPositions)this.in).nextPosition()
.
Further, thanks for the changes in build.xml. This actually reflects a more
seemless variant that is usable stand-alone as well as in IDEs such as
Eclipse (see older mails on this topic in the lucene lists).
As a suggestion: The clean target does not sweep the javacc outputs from the
source files. This should be in especially if someone works on the jj files.
Regards, Gregor
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: [FilterIndexReader]; [build.xml] RC2 package build issues.
Posted by Erik Hatcher <er...@ehatchersolutions.com>.
On Thursday, November 6, 2003, at 09:13 AM, Gregor Heinrich wrote:\
> FilterIndexReader.FilterTermPositions.nextPosition() where the member
> in is
> referenced. Although it actually is the same variable in a twofold
> interpretation -- inherited from FilterTermDocs and accessed via
> enclosing
> scope also from FilterTermDocs -- the compiler frontend detects an
> error. I
> think it would not
> be a problem for anyone to make the reference explicit by replacing
>
> ((TermPositions)in).nextPosition()
>
> by
>
> ((TermPositions)this.in).nextPosition()
Sounds like a bug you should report to Eclipse. No error reported in
IDEA :))
I've gone ahead and committed this change though.
Erik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: lucene-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: lucene-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org