Re: [PR] Use J2N methods instead of StringBuilder.Remove, #664 [lucenenet]

["paulirwin (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>]

paulirwin commented on PR #1132:
URL: https://github.com/apache/lucenenet/pull/1132#issuecomment-6256242227

   @NightOwl888 This is finally ready for review.
   
   Previously I had posted that this was waiting on the OpenStringBuilder/TextBuilder work, but that turned out to be (somewhat) incorrect. It was really waiting on https://github.com/NightOwl888/J2N/issues/171, as you pointed out to me separately. Some of these stemmers could be moved to TextBuilder, but that would be a separate concern that should be justified independently via benchmarking.
   
   This PR now ensures:
   - Every plan `Remove` is now `Delete`, which clamps instead of throwing.
   - `Remove().Insert()` pairs are now J2N's `Replace`, as #664 specified.
   - The `Delete` clamping is in J2N alpha 53, which master already uses, so nothing is still blocked.
   - `Remove(0, Length)` calls are now `Clear()` which has better semantics and avoids possible argument math issues.


-- 
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.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucenenet.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org