[sword-devel] FFe application for sword being considered, and patches split out

Matthew Talbert ransom1982 at gmail.com
Mon Aug 31 07:51:28 MST 2009

> Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
> > Quick note: I remember scanning the patch originally sent seeing a
> > 'new' without an obvious delete.  Please be sure to check for this.
> > I may be wrong; it was a quick observation.
> You could well be right, the stopwords patch
>  http://crosswire.org/~jmarsden/17_no_stop_words.diff
> probably needs a line
>  delete analyzer;
> added to the group of deletes, after the existing line
>  delete an;
> Matthew: Do you agree with this proposed patch to your patch? :)

Yes, I should have added that. Previously it was initialized without
using new, so no delete was necessary.

However, I recommend that you switch to using the SimpleAnalyzer
rather than StandardAnalyzer. All that's needed it to replace
occurrences of standard::StandardAnalyzer to SimpleAnalyzer (no
namespace needed), and remove all references to stop_words. Based on
my experiments, I believe this is the best way to do it.

> Sounds good to me.  I'm not trying to push you along, at all (though I'd
> be happy to see a 1.6.1 release, especially if it has some working test
> suites and ideally some utility regression tests in it!).  I'm just
> trying to see if we can get some known bugs in the 1.6.0 codebase fixed
> in our SWORD packages before Ubuntu Karmic goes out the door --
> otherwise the fixes won't officially be in Ubuntu for yet another six
> months.  Seeing xiphos segfault and die when you search for the word
> "is" ... well, it just doesn't feel good :)

My feelings as well.


More information about the sword-devel mailing list