I'd love to see the progress on this. On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Roman Chyla <roman.ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > The standard lucene/solr parsing is nice but not really flexible. I > saw questions and discussion about ANTLR, but unfortunately never a > working grammar, so... maybe you find this useful: > > https://github.com/romanchyla/montysolr/tree/master/src/java/org/apache/lucene/queryParser/iqp/antlr > > In the grammar, the parsing is completely abstracted from the Lucene > objects, and the parser is not mixed with Java code. At first it > produces structures like this: > > https://svnweb.cern.ch/trac/rcarepo/raw-attachment/wiki/MontySolrQueryParser/index.html > > But now I have a problem. I don't know if I should use query parsing > framework in contrib. > > It seems that the qParser in contrib can use different parser > generators (the default JavaCC, but also ANTLR). But I am confused and > I don't understand this new queryParser from contrib. It is really > very confusing to me. Is there any benefit in trying to plug the ANTLR > tree into it? Because looking at the AST pictures, it seems that with > a relatively simple tree walker we could build the same queries as the > current standard lucene query parser. And it would be much simpler and > flexible. Does it bring something new? I have a feeling I miss > something... > > Many thanks for help, > > Roman > -- - sent from my mobile 6176064373
