On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > Lucene query logic is not strict Boolean logic, the article above explains > why.
tl;dr it mostly comes down to scoring and syntax. The scoring argument will depend on how much you care. (My care for scoring is pretty close to zero, as I don't care whether the better results come first, as long as the exact results come back and the non-results don't.) For the syntax: * The article doesn't really address the (-NOT) problem, where essentially Lucene could insert an implicit *:* when there isn't one, to make those queries at least get a sane result. You can work around this by customising the query parser, possible for both for the classic one (subclass it and override the method to create the BooleanQuery) and the flexible one (add a processor to the pipeline). * The article strongly encourages using the +/- syntax instead of AND/OR/NOT, but the astute might notice that AND/OR/NOT is three operators, whereas +/- is only two, so clearly one of the boolean clause types does not have a prefix operator, making it literally impossible to specify some queries using the prefix operators alone. TX --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-user-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: java-user-h...@lucene.apache.org
