On 28 Sep 2009, at 10:08, Emmanuel Bernard wrote: > > On 28 sept. 09, at 10:48, Manik Surtani wrote: > >> >> On 27 Sep 2009, at 11:26, Sanne Grinovero wrote: >> >>> Next version of Lucene will provide helpers and tools to make it >>> easy >>> to create your own QueryParser, so that everyone can make his one >>> based on business-specific needs >>> (Everybody can already, but is not as easy). >>> So I would avoid reinventing that, and focus on a good API. >>> >>> To make this API very cool IMHO it should integrate with Hibernate >>> Search to exploit all knowledge about object mapping, declarative >>> Analyzer and Filter definitions, and so on... >>> We concluded in another thread that to make best use of this >>> information we need to give the type of what you're searching for >>> as a >>> parameter, so that from the specific >>> mapping the analyzers, fields and fieldbridges can be matched. >>> Should be fine, it means we can provide typesafe results? >> >> Are you suggesting that this is made to be specific to Hibernate >> Search, rather than more generic, for Lucene? As far as Infinispan >> is >> concerned I couldn't care either way since we just depend on HS. > > Yes, if you check the thread history we've discussed the benefits of > tying the DSL to Hibernate Search's metadata. We could basically save > a lot of pain points like analyzers and type conversion for users (and > we can't if we stay pure Lucene based).
Yup, makes sense. Cheers -- Manik Surtani ma...@jboss.org Lead, Infinispan Lead, JBoss Cache http://www.infinispan.org http://www.jbosscache.org _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
