[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10132?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15878097#comment-15878097
 ] 

Gus Heck commented on SOLR-10132:
---------------------------------

Hmm, would it be possible to test like this:

{code}
if (termFilter != SimpleFacets.MATCH_ALL) {
  final BytesRef term = si.lookupOrd(startTermIndex+i);
  if (!termFilter.test(term)) {
    continue;
  }
}
{code}

I'm generally not fond of null except when representing an unknown primitive 
value (boxed of course), which is why I tried to eliminate it. It's not very 
self documenting, and retaining it  the list + switch you have added or a 
string of if/else checking as in the original code, plus and a lot of other 
reasons. http://www.yegor256.com/2014/05/13/why-null-is-bad.html is more 
eloquent than I on this... 

Perhaps it should be named {{MATCH_ALL_TERMS}} however, to avoid sounding like 
it has something to do with {{MatchAllDocsQuery()}}

> Support facet.matches to cull facets returned with a regex
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-10132
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10132
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>      Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) 
>          Components: faceting
>    Affects Versions: 6.4.1
>            Reporter: Gus Heck
>            Assignee: Christine Poerschke
>         Attachments: SOLR-10132.patch, SOLR-10132.patch, SOLR-10132.patch
>
>
> I recently ran into a case where I really wanted to only return the next 
> level of a hierarchical facet, and while I was able to do that with a 
> coordinated set of dynamic fields, it occurred to me that this would have 
> been much much easier if I could have simply used PathHierarchyTokenizer and 
> written
> &facet.matches="/my/current/prefix/[^/]+$"
> thereby limiting the returned facets to the next level down and not return 
> the  additional  N levels I didn't (yet) want to display (numbering in the 
> thousands near the top of the tree). I suspect there are other good use 
> cases, and the patch seemed relatively tractable.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to