msokolov commented on PR #15784: URL: https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/15784#issuecomment-5414127208
I wonder what we could do in the future to avoid having the same function signature change the meaning of its parameters -- when changing the name of the parameters is not enough. I guess in the case of a named function, one can make a new function with a new name, and I guess deprecate the old one. In this case the function was a constructor, so doing something like that would have required a new class, which seems kind of heavy. Maybe we could have added a parameter and deprecated the old parameter? I'm not really sure how we could have better signaled the change in behavior. I guess the Abstract class was not accessible outside the package, but for the subclasses we could have been more explicit somehow -- 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: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
