I think it was my email Yonik responded to and he is right, I was being lazy and didn't read the javadoc very carefully.My bad. Thanks for the javadoc change.
-John On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Yonik Seeley <yo...@lucidimagination.com>wrote: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 4:35 PM, Jake Mannix <jake.man...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > It may be surprising, but in fact I have read that > > javadoc. > > It was not your email I responded to. > > > It talks about not needing to close the > > writer, but doesn't specifically talk about the what > > the relationship between commit() calls and > > getReader() calls is. > > Do you have a suggestion of how to update the JavaDoc? > I'm not sure I understand the relationship between commit and > getReader that you refer to. > > > , but why > > is it so obvious that what could be happening > > is that it only "returns all changes since the last > > commit, but without touching disk because it > > has docs in memory as well"? > > Sorry, this seems confusing - I'm not sure what you're trying to say. > Perhaps we should approach this as proposed javadoc changes? > > -Yonik > http://www.lucidimagination.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
