[LUCENE-7039] Improve PointRangeQuery & co

• Type: Task
• Status: Resolved
• Priority: Major
• Resolution: Fixed
• Fix Version/s: 6.0
• Lucene Fields: New
• Assignee: Unassigned
• Reporter: Robert Muir
• Created: 20/Feb/16 14:36
• Updated: 28/Aug/22 14:50
• Resolved: 23/Feb/16 00:33

Description

The point types are now preferred for indexing numeric fields, but PointRangeQuery has some usability issues.

I think we should make the following changes:

• newIntRange(), newLongRange(), newFloatRange(),newDoubleRange(), newBinaryRange(): simple 1D ranges consistent with NumericRangeQuery naming.
• newMultiIntRange(), newMultiLongRange(), newMultiFloatRange(), newMultiDoubleRange(), newMultiBinaryRange(): multi-dimensional versions of the above (take arrays, a bit harder to use, but the arrays have correct type!)
• toString() should be meaningful, it should not spew binary nonsense unless you used a binary range!
• improve javadocs

If we like this, we could do similar improvements for the ExactPointQuery