On Monday 22 January 2007 22:29, Chris Hostetter wrote: > > : With my syntax you can get real precedence that mixes with how no > : precedence (Lucene's unary operators) works. No precedence is created by > : allowing you to make any operator resolve first...any operator that > : resolves first connected with another operator that resolves first will > : behave as if neither has precedence over the other and generate a single > : BooleanQuery. > > what i was trying to get at is that i don't think precedence is really the > issue -- it's the lack of unary operators. If the only way to get a > single BooleanQuery is to use operators that have the exact same > precedence, and all operators are binary, then how to you create the > equivilent of QueryParser "+a b c -d -e" ? ... if i remember your syntax > correctly the only way to match the same documents is... > "a & ( b | c ) ! d ! e" > > ...but it won't score the same way because the parens force a nested > boolean query to be created.
I considered adding the removal of such nests to the surround query language, but I never took the time to actually do it. Anyway, which of the two forms is more user friendly? I wish I knew, but the lack of brackets in the prefix form is tempting. Thanks for spelling this out, Paul Elschot --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
