BUG: Lucene.Net.Search.FieldComparer.TermValComparer: Fixed sorting ambiguity between empty fields and missing fields #912
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…ot mistaken for missing values.
…on instance breaks missing vs empty field comparison because the static fields MISSING_BYTES and NON_MISSING_BYTES are tested for reference equality.
… so users upgrading from older versions of Lucene.NET don't attempt to use this class and instead use the Lucene equivalent class, FieldComparer<T>.
|
great catch! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary of the changes (Less than 80 chars)
Lucene.Net.Search.FieldComparer.TermValComparer: Fixed sorting ambiguity between empty fields and missing fieldsDescription
When using
Arrays.Empty<T>()we get a singleton instance. However, this comparer uses reference equality to compare the static fieldsMISSING_BYTESandNON_MISSING_BYTES. This reverts back tonew byte[0]to ensure the reference equality checks pass.BREAKING
This PR also adds an internal constructor to
FieldComparer, since this is a class that we added to make Lucene.NET compile. It is confusing for users who are upgrading because in older versionsFieldComparerwas not a generic class. Users who are upgrading should useFieldComparer<T>, which reduces or eliminates the need for casting of the underlying type.