gf2121 commented on PR #14922: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/14922#issuecomment-3057858468
> i.e. not actually accounting for upTo bits, but instead just for bitSize Good point, I checked `BitsetIterator#intoBitset` and we had similar logic there. https://github.com/apache/lucene/blob/633bb1c68edf7a63885396e5e504c439d92dea92/lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/util/BitSetIterator.java#L99-L105 But we did not have the check when it comes to the default impl. https://github.com/apache/lucene/blob/633bb1c68edf7a63885396e5e504c439d92dea92/lucene/core/src/java/org/apache/lucene/search/DocIdSetIterator.java#L205-L210 To me the contract here is that caller should guarantee there is no doc between `offset + bitset.length()` and `upTo` if `offset + bitset.length() < upTo`. Maybe we should clarify it in java doc, then there is no difference between current impl and check `upTo == NO_MORE_DOCS` only. It would be great if @jpountz can double check this :) -- 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
