gsmiller commented on PR #12427: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12427#issuecomment-1644602539
> I like the idea to throw IAE if wrong input is provided. I think this would only affect the cases with assert disabled? otherwise with asserts enabled we anyways always keep track of previous term. That's right. I imagine a lot of users disable asserts when running in a production environment for performance reasons, so the only concern here is that we're adding some new work for them to do this validation. I still think the explicit validation is better in this situation, but the counter-argument would be a user that knows for sure they're always properly providing sorted input and don't want the overhead of the validation. As for `Iterable` vs. `Collection`, I agree that `Iterable` is more appropriate for the API. Whether-or-not it's worth making that change though in a back-compat way is maybe a different question? > I don't see why do we even have a separate BytesRefIterator interface and not just using Iterator instead(maybe because its legacy code?) or is it that I'm missing something important here? I think it's so that `next` can throw `IOException`? You can't do that with `Iterator<BytesRef>`. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
