lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Itamar Syn-Hershko <ita...@code972.com>
Subject Re: 4.x Stories to be picked up
Date Tue, 06 Jan 2015 16:13:46 GMT
By Expressions we mean Lucene Expressions, see
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/tree/trunk/lucene/expressions/src/java/org/apache/lucene/expressions

Its based on Antlr, but Hakeems says they are doing some additional funky
stuff.

What were you suggesting?

--

Itamar Syn-Hershko
http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
Freelance Developer & Consultant
Author of RavenDB in Action <http://manning.com/synhershko/>

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:09 PM, Paul Irwin <pirwin@feature23.com> wrote:

> As of .NET 4, it is preferable to use Expressions over Reflection.Emit due
> to compile-time safety that helps prevent run-time errors (like crashing
> the CLR, which I've totally done with Reflection.Emit before), since .NET
> 4+ includes nearly-complete Expression support that can be used to build
> just about any function. I'd definitely prefer Expressions to
> Reflection.Emit. Or am I misunderstanding something? (Sorry, haven't been
> able to dive into the code lately, but trying to stay on top of the
> emails.)
>
>
> Paul Irwin
> Lead Software Engineer
> feature[23]
>
> Email: pirwin@feature23.com
> Cell: 863-698-9294
>
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <itamar@code972.com>
> wrote:
>
> > As long as the tests are green and implementation makes sense, I'm good
> > with that. At least for this first phase.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> > Author of RavenDB in Action <http://manning.com/synhershko/>
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Hakeem Mohammed <hakeemosrc@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > They have used the classwriter and Genadaptor to generate types from
> > > bytecode. So the design is string expressions are tokenized, bytecodes
> > were
> > > genned from the tokenized byte arrays and then the asm library was used
> > to
> > > create java classes out of the bytecode. They probably did it that way
> > > because the generated types needed to be subclassed from the Expression
> > > type. We could use Reflection.Emit instead. But do let me know if you
> > have
> > > any other ideas
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> itamar@code972.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > It is an overkill. What did they use asm for? All you need to port
> > > > Expressions is Antlr really
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > > > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko>
> > > > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> > > > Author of RavenDB in Action <http://manning.com/synhershko/>
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Hakeem Mohammed <
> hakeemosrc@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Yes the Java impl is using Antlr already, but they also used the
> asm
> > > > > library. That is where I'm debating whether to use Expression trees
> > or
> > > go
> > > > > for Roslyn. The latter looks like a bit of overkill though
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> > > itamar@code972.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, the tokenizer implementations
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > > > > > http://code972.com | @synhershko <https://twitter.com/synhershko
> >
> > > > > > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> > > > > > Author of RavenDB in Action <http://manning.com/synhershko/>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Paul Irwin <pirwin@feature23.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ah, I thought there was some place they were using another
> parser
> > > > > > > generator, but in the case of Antlr grammar already there,
have
> > at
> > > > it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Paul Irwin
> > > > > > > Lead Software Engineer
> > > > > > > feature[23]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Email: pirwin@feature23.com
> > > > > > > Cell: 863-698-9294
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Itamar Syn-Hershko <
> > > > > itamar@code972.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > They are using Antlr for generating the Java bits
there
> > anyway..
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > > > > > > > http://code972.com | @synhershko <
> > https://twitter.com/synhershko
> > > >
> > > > > > > > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> > > > > > > > Author of RavenDB in Action <http://manning.com/synhershko/>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Paul Irwin <
> > pirwin@feature23.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I'd caution against reinventing the wheel on
the parsing
> > right
> > > > now.
> > > > > > It
> > > > > > > > may
> > > > > > > > > be a faster path to just convert the generated
java parsers
> > > into
> > > > C#
> > > > > > > using
> > > > > > > > > an automated tool, as I did on my earlier Lucene
4.3
> porting
> > > so I
> > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > attest to it. I was able to validate that they
parsed
> > correctly
> > > > and
> > > > > > > even
> > > > > > > > > used that ported code in a production app. Rewriting
a
> parser
> > > may
> > > > > not
> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > > the best use of time right now -- although I
can certainly
> > see
> > > > the
> > > > > > > value
> > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > doing so later on.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You can use my little utility to convert the
syntax of
> entire
> > > > files
> > > > > > at
> > > > > > > > > once: https://github.com/paulirwin/javatocsharp
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Paul Irwin
> > > > > > > > > Lead Software Engineer
> > > > > > > > > feature[23]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Email: pirwin@feature23.com
> > > > > > > > > Cell: 863-698-9294
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Hakeem Mohammed
<
> > > > > > hakeemosrc@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks Itamar and Laimonas. I appreciate
the details and
> > glad
> > > > to
> > > > > > help
> > > > > > > > . I
> > > > > > > > > > got started on Expressions and half way
there. I'm using
> > > Antlr
> > > > > 4.3
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > parsing. Please let me know if that is what
y'all were
> > > planning
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > > > > anyway. I'll get to the index tests in core
after that
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko
<
> > > > > > > itamar@code972.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Hakeem, welcome on board!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Laimonas's response is spot on, let
us know if you have
> > any
> > > > > > further
> > > > > > > > > > > questions.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I personally don't have any preference
- once we get
> to 0
> > > > test
> > > > > > > > failures
> > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > the core we will concentrate on finishing
porting the
> > rest
> > > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > sub-projects (Analysis.Common, Codecs,
Suggest) with
> all
> > > > their
> > > > > > > tests,
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > then porting more sub-projects.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > So I guess pick whatever you think
you'd enjoy most,
> just
> > > > make
> > > > > > sure
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > keep
> > > > > > > > > > > us in the loop!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Itamar Syn-Hershko
> > > > > > > > > > > http://code972.com | @synhershko <
> > > > > https://twitter.com/synhershko
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Freelance Developer & Consultant
> > > > > > > > > > > Author of RavenDB in Action <
> > > http://manning.com/synhershko/>
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Hakeem
Mohammed <
> > > > > > > > hakeemosrc@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I just joined this group and looking
to offer some
> help
> > > in
> > > > > > > updating
> > > > > > > > > > > Lucene
> > > > > > > > > > > > to 4.8. I briefly skimmed thru
but could not find any
> > > items
> > > > > > > related
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > 4.x work. I'd very much appreciate
it if someone can
> > let
> > > me
> > > > > > know
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > process for picking up items to
work on. I spent a
> > couple
> > > > > weeks
> > > > > > > > > > updating
> > > > > > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > > > outdated branch of Lucene, so
trying to avoid that
> > > mistake
> > > > > > again
> > > > > > > :)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message